Skip to main content
Glama
lumifyai

Lumify Sports Intelligence

get_player_events

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a player's scheduled and completed events with pagination and date filters. Provide player_id from search_players to get results.

Instructions

List a player's events (schedule/results), paginated by id (after_id). Defaults to ±30 days around today when no date filter is given. Resolve player_id via search_players first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoEnd date YYYY-MM-DD.
fromNoStart date YYYY-MM-DD.
limitNoMax events to return per page.
statusNoFilter to events in this status.
after_idNoCursor: last event id from the previous page's next_after_id.
player_idYesPlayer id, from search_players.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoEvents in the same shape as list_events' EventSummary.
has_moreNo
player_idNo
next_after_idNoPass as after_id to fetch the next page; null on the last page.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent. The description adds useful behavioral details: pagination by after_id and the default ±30-day date window when no filter is provided. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Every clause adds value: scope, pagination, default window, and prerequisite. Zero waste.

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 a full output schema and rich annotations, the description doesn't need to detail return format or safety. It covers core behavior, pagination, defaults, and the player_id prerequisite, making it complete for the tool's complexity.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, including player_id origin and after_id cursor semantics. The description reiterates these but doesn't add substantially new parameter-level information beyond connecting the pagination flow.

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 it lists a player's events, with 'player's' distinguishing it from broader event tools. The parenthetical (schedule/results) and pagination mention add specificity. This is a specific verb+resource+scope, meeting the top criteria.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides clear context: it's for retrieving a specific player's events, and instructs to resolve player_id via search_players first. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative event-listing tools like list_events or query_events, so it lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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