Comunio MCP

Squad

get_squad

Read-only

Fetch a fantasy football squad's players with prices, points, injuries, lineup status, and next match. Inspect your own or a rival's squad using manager_id.

Instructions

Get every player in a squad, with availability, scoring, prices and lineup state. Defaults to the signed-in manager's own squad.

Pass manager_id to inspect a rival's squad instead — the ids come from get_standings. Rival squads are fully visible: prices, injuries and depth. What is not visible is recommended_price, which Comunio only gives for your own players.

Per player: position and club; status with status_info naming an injury; points, last_points and average_points; quoted_price and recommended_price; whether they are linedup or a substitute; whether they are on_market; and next_match with its kick-off time.

summary counts what lineup rules are checked against, tactic is the formation set, and is_mine says whose squad came back.

Read-only: fetches current state and changes nothing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`manager_id`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`owner`	No	Manager the squad belongs to
`tactic`	Yes	Formation the lineup is set up for, e.g. '442'
`is_mine`	No	Whether this is the signed-in manager's own squad
`players`	Yes
`summary`	Yes
`owner_id`	No	That manager's identifier

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.2Sep 9, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces it with 'Read-only: fetches current state and changes nothing.' Beyond that, it discloses detailed behavioral aspects: per-player fields (status, points, prices, lineup state), what is hidden for rival squads (recommended_price), and the presence of summary, tactic, and is_mine. This is substantial added context beyond the annotation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is well-structured with a clear lead sentence, a dedicated paragraph for the parameter usage, a bullet-like enumeration of player fields, and a closing read-only note. Every sentence adds value, and the most critical information (purpose and parameter usage) is front-loaded.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With only one optional parameter and an output schema present, the description provides a thorough high-level overview of the response structure (per-player details, summary, tactic, is_mine) and covers edge cases like rival squad visibility. Nothing essential for calling the tool correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates. It explains that manager_id is optional, defaults to null (own squad), and provides guidance on obtaining valid ids via get_standings. This gives the parameter meaning beyond the bare integer/null schema definition.

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 opens with a precise verb-resource statement: 'Get every player in a squad, with availability, scoring, prices and lineup state.' It distinguishes itself from siblings by explaining the optional manager_id path for rival squads and referencing get_standings for ids, so an agent can tell it apart from get_player or get_market.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly says it defaults to the signed-in manager's own squad and instructs to pass manager_id to inspect a rival's squad, with a pointer to get_standings for valid ids. It also clarifies what is and isn't visible for rivals, leaving no ambiguity about when to call this tool versus alternatives.

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