Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wiseoldman-mcp

wiseoldman-mcp

by jhaenen
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Add competition teams

wom_add_competition_teams

Add multiple teams to an existing team competition using the competition ID and verification code.

Instructions

Adds teams to an existing team competition. Requires the verification code.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "verificationCode": "<verificationCode>",
      "teams": "<teams>"
    },
    "name": "wom_add_competition_teams"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe competition's numeric Wise Old Man ID.
teamsYes
verificationCodeYesThe competition's verification code, given when it was created. Required for any mutating action.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects, failure modes (wrong code, non-existent competition), or whether teams are appended or replaced.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise but too brief to cover necessary details. It is missing key information that could be added without verbosity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not specify that the competition must be a team-based one or how existing teams are affected.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 67%, and the description adds a requirement for verification code but does not explain the teams array structure beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Adds' and the resource 'teams to an existing team competition', which distinguishes it from siblings like wom_remove_competition_teams and wom_add_competition_participants.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description only mentions a prerequisite (verification code) but provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., wom_add_competition_participants) or when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools