Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@Pitch Queens MCP Server What are the rules of Pitch Queens?"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
Women's World Cup 2027 Simulator, Bracket & Predictions
A Model Context Protocol server that exposes the canonical Pitch Queens knowledge surface — game rules, modes, constraints, and entry points, FAQ, official links — to MCP-compatible AI clients such as Claude Desktop, Cursor, Windsurf, and Continue. Read-only, with no API keys or usage quota required.
Official website: https://pitch-queens.pages.dev
Pitch Queens is a free, independent simulator and prediction game for the 2027 Women's World Cup in Brazil. Its public tools include a full-tournament simulator, bracket predictor, browser-computed title odds, a daily challenge, private leagues, qualification status, and team pages.
The current pre-draw field combines confirmed teams with projected qualifiers so a complete 32-team tournament can be simulated before qualification and the official draw are final. Team strength ratings and probabilistic match results are site-authored entertainment projections, not official forecasts, betting advice, or statements about the final field.
This MCP exposes the documented rules, entry points, and projection boundaries as read-only context. It does not run a simulation, submit a daily pick, create or join a league, or return live odds. Pitch Queens is an independent fan project and is not affiliated with FIFA.
Related MCP server: MatchBrief
get_game_rulesReturn the verified game rules, modes, constraints, and public entry points the site exposes. (Pitch Queens)
Input: no parameters. Returns: text/markdown.
get_official_linksReturn the canonical list of official links for Pitch Queens (website, support, docs when available).
Input: no parameters. Returns: text/markdown.
site://pitch-queens/rules — Verified game rules, modes, constraints, and public entry points.
site://pitch-queens/faq — Short FAQ generated from public site metadata.
site://pitch-queens/links — Canonical URLs to share with users.
tell_me_about_pitch_queensSummarize what the site is, who it's for, and how it works. — Pitch Queens
plan_a_run_pitch_queensPlan a single play-through using verified rules and entry points. — Pitch Queens
npx -y @smithery/cli install pitch-queens-mcp --client claude(Replace claude with cursor, windsurf, or continue for those clients.)
git clone https://github.com/rocnubie/pitch-queens-mcp.git
cd pitch-queens-mcp
pnpm installThen add to your MCP client config (claude_desktop_config.json for Claude Desktop, mcp.json for Cursor / Windsurf / Continue):
{
"mcpServers": {
"pitch-queens-mcp": {
"command": "node",
"args": [
"/absolute/path/to/pitch-queens-mcp/src/index.mjs"
]
}
}
}npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector node src/index.mjspnpm install
pnpm start # run the server over stdioMIT
Return the verified game rules, modes, constraints, and public entry points the site exposes. (Pitch Queens)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only mentions that the rules are 'verified', which implies quality assurance, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or other behavioral aspects. The description is minimal, leaving the agent with limited understanding of side effects or constraints.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the main action and content without any wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple, parameterless tool.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema or annotations, the description provides a brief list of what is returned but does not specify format, potential errors, or how the data is structured. It covers the essentials but leaves gaps in completeness for an agent to fully utilize the output.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty. The description adds meaning by explaining what the return value contains (game rules, modes, constraints, entry points), compensating for the lack of parameters. According to guidelines, 0 parameters baseline is 4, and the description fulfills that.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states that the tool returns 'verified game rules, modes, constraints, and public entry points'. It uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource, and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'get_official_links' which likely provides links instead of rules.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool should be used to obtain game rules but does not explicitly state when to use it versus the sibling tool or provide any prerequisites or exclusions. Usage context is implied rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Return the canonical list of official links for Pitch Queens (website, support, docs when available).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided; description gives basic info ('canonical list', 'when available') but could be more explicit about data freshness or edge cases.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence with no extraneous words; front-loaded with action and subject.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Adequate for a zero-parameter tool with no output schema; could optionally mention link format or caveats.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters (baseline 4), description adds value by enumerating types of links (website, support, docs) beyond schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description uses specific verb 'Return' and resource 'canonical list of official links', clearly distinguishing from sibling get_game_rules.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Clear context for use (retrieves links for Pitch Queens), no ambiguity; lacks explicit when-not or alternatives but not necessary for such a simple tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
v0.1.0get_game_rulesget_official_linksEach tool retrieves distinct information: one for game rules, one for official links. No overlap in purpose.
Both tools follow a consistent 'get_noun' pattern using snake_case, making them predictable.
Only 2 tools for a game server is insufficient; typical game servers offer 5-15 tools for gameplay and interaction.
The server lacks any gameplay tools (e.g., start game, submit score), making it severely incomplete for its apparent purpose.
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Read-only MCP server for Flamel.ai's public content: company overview, blog, case studies, FAQs.
Read-only MCP server for RZ AI Labs — query its services, workshops, and contact info.
Hosted MCP server for live public-data APIs and Skills for AI agents.
Read-only MCP server for The Quiet Protocol's engines, benchmarks, proof, and business data.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rocnubie/pitch-queens-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server
