Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenF1 MCP Server

OpenF1 MCP Server

by ragulhari
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Laps

get_laps
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve Formula 1 lap data—lap and sector times, speed traps, pit-out status, and mini-sector segments—filtered by session, driver, or lap to analyze race and qualifying performance.

Instructions

Lap data: lap time, sector times, intermediate and speed-trap speeds, pit-out flag, mini-sector segments (segments are not available in races).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of records to return (default 200, max 1000). A summary is added when the result is larger.
fieldsNoReturn only these attributes. Use this to make large results smaller.
filtersNoExtra comparison filters, e.g. [{"field":"lap_duration","op":"<","value":90}]. Allowed fields: date_start, driver_number, duration_sector_1, duration_sector_2, duration_sector_3, i1_speed, i2_speed, is_pit_out_lap, lap_duration, lap_number, meeting_key, segments_sector_1, segments_sector_2, segments_sector_3, session_key, st_speed. Array fields cannot be filtered.
lap_numberNoLap number (starts at 1).
meeting_keyNoMeeting (Grand Prix weekend) identifier. Use "latest" for the current or most recent meeting.
session_keyNoSession identifier. Use "latest" for the current or most recent session.
driver_numberNoDriver number(s) for the season, e.g. 1, 44, 81. Give a list to get more than one driver.
is_pit_out_lapNoOnly pit-out laps (true) or only other laps (false).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a useful behavioral caveat that segments are not available in races, but it does not discuss pagination, filtering behavior, or result-size handling.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single dense sentence that front-loads the returned data fields and includes the race-availability caveat. It is concise and wastes little space, though the list-like structure could be clearer.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For an eight-parameter read-only endpoint with no output schema, the description covers the returned data and one important availability caveat. However, it omits usage context and does not help the agent decide how to scope requests via session, meeting, driver, or filters.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all eight parameters are already documented in the schema, including limit, filters, meeting_key, session_key, and driver_number. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the resource and returned fields: lap time, sector times, intermediate/speed-trap speeds, pit-out flag, and mini-sector segments. It is more specific than a tautology, but it does not distinguish the tool from siblings such as get_stints or compare_fastest_laps.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use get_laps versus alternatives. The data fields imply it is the lap-level endpoint, but the description gives no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools.

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