Skip to main content
Glama
owen-lacey

FPL MCP Server

by owen-lacey

Get Chip Data

getChipData

Fetch chip usage data for Fantasy Premier League teams to track strategic decisions and optimize gameplay.

Instructions

Fetch all chip data

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • src/server.ts:233-247 (registration)
    Registration of the MCP tool 'getChipData' with empty input schema, title, description, and an inline handler that calls the underlying getChipData function and returns JSON stringified response.
    server.registerTool("getChipData", {
      title: "Get Chip Data",
      description: "Fetch all chip data",
      inputSchema: {}
    }, async () => {
      const data = await getChipData();
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(data)
          }
        ]
      };
    });
  • Core handler logic for fetching chip data from FPL bootstrap-static API and returning the chips array. This is the main implementation delegated by the MCP tool handler.
    export async function getChipData(): Promise<Partial<FplApiObject>> {
      const data = await getBootstrapStatic();
      return {
        chips: data.chips,
      };
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the structure of FplApiObject, including the 'chips' field used in getChipData return type.
    export interface FplApiObject {
      chips: Partial<Chip>[];
      events: Partial<Event>[];
      element_types: Partial<ElementType>[];
      teams: Partial<Team>[];
      elements: Partial<Element>[];
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the Chip object structure returned by getChipData.
    export interface Chip {
      id: number;
      name: string;
      number: number;
      start_event: number;
      stop_event: number;
      chip_type: string;
      overrides: ChipOverride;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Fetch all chip data' implies a read operation, but it doesn't specify whether this is safe, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the return format might be. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 extremely concise with just three words, front-loading the key action and resource. There is no wasted language or unnecessary elaboration, making it efficient and easy to parse for an agent.

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 complexity (a data-fetching tool with no annotations and no output schema), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'chip data' includes, how results are structured, or any behavioral traits. For a tool in a context with many sibling tools, more detail is needed to ensure the agent can use it correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add param details, which is appropriate here. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters, as it avoids redundancy and aligns with the schema's completeness.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'Fetch all chip data' states a clear verb ('fetch') and resource ('chip data'), providing a basic purpose. However, it lacks specificity about what 'chip data' entails and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'getPlayerData' or 'getTeamData', making it somewhat vague. It avoids tautology by not merely restating the name/title.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, such as how it relates to sibling tools like 'getEntry' or 'getGameweekData'. This leaves the agent without direction on appropriate usage scenarios.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/owen-lacey/fpl-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server