League of Legends MCP Server

LoL get summoner

lol_get_summoner

Retrieve a summoner's level and profile icon using their PUUID.

Instructions

Get summoner info (level, profile icon) by PUUID

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": {
      "puuid": "<puuid>"
    },
    "name": "lol_get_summoner"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`puuid`	Yes	Player PUUID
`platform`	No	Platform: euw1, eun1, na1, kr, jp1, br1, la1, la2, oc1, tr1, ru	euw1

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.1Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions the returned fields (level, profile icon) but fails to state that this is a read-only operation, whether authentication is needed, or what happens on failure (e.g., invalid PUUID). The basic description is insufficient for an informed agent.

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 a single, highly concise sentence that immediately conveys the core function. No extraneous words or details.

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?

The description mentions the key output fields (level, profile icon), which is helpful given there is no output schema. However, it omits other important details such as the return format, potential error scenarios, and prerequisites (e.g., needing a PUUID from a prior call). It is adequate but not fully complete for a tool with no output schema.

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%, with both parameters described adequately in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond repeating 'by PUUID'. According to the rules, baseline 3 is correct as the schema already documents the parameters.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('summoner info'), specific fields ('level, profile icon'), and the identifier ('by PUUID'). This directly distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve other data (e.g., account, match history) or use different identifiers.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like lol_get_account or lol_get_player_profile. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or explicit context for selection.

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