mcp-tournament
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| OPENROUTER_API_KEY | Yes | API key for OpenRouter. Required for all roles by default. | |
| TOURNAMENT_RESULTS_DIR | No | Directory for results output. Defaults to './results'. | |
| TOURNAMENT_MODEL_JUDGE_RULES | No | Model override for the rules judge role (e.g., 'openai/gpt-5.4-mini'). | |
| TOURNAMENT_MODEL_PARTICIPANT | No | Model override for the participant agent role (e.g., 'deepseek/deepseek-v3.2'). | |
| TOURNAMENT_MODEL_SYNTHESIZER | No | Model override for the synthesizer role (e.g., 'moonshotai/kimi-k2.5'). |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| tournament.evaluateB | Evaluate one to four candidate models with a judge panel. |
| tournament.quick_testC | Run one scenario with one judge and no synthesis model call. |
| tournament.leaderboardC | Read the best cached score per model from result files. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool has a distinct purpose: quick test runs a minimal scenario, leaderboard reads cached scores, and evaluate runs a full evaluation. No overlap or ambiguity.
Naming is inconsistent: 'quick_test' uses underscore and adjective+noun, 'leaderboard' is a single noun without underscore, and 'evaluate' is a bare verb. No consistent pattern in structure or part of speech.
With 3 tools, the server is at the low end of the typical 3-15 range but still reasonable for a focused evaluation service. The scope is narrow enough that each tool earns its place.
The tools cover the core workflow: quick test, full evaluation, and reading results. Minor gaps exist, such as no tool for configuring judges or scenarios, but these are likely predefined or managed externally.