Skip to main content
Glama
stevenyuser

NBA MCP Server

by stevenyuser

get_player_awards

Retrieve NBA player awards by providing their unique identifier. This tool accesses the NBA database to return recognition and honors for specific basketball players.

Instructions

Get awards for a player by their ID.

Args: player_id: str The id of the player.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
player_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • server.py:27-40 (handler)
    The main handler function for the 'get_player_awards' tool. It is decorated with @mcp.tool for registration. Takes a player_id, fetches awards using nba_api.stats.endpoints.playerawards.PlayerAwards, and returns the data as dict or error.
    @mcp.tool
    def get_player_awards(player_id: str) -> dict:
        """
        Get awards for a player by their ID.
    
        Args:
          player_id: str
            The id of the player.
        """
        try:
          awards = playerawards.PlayerAwards(player_id=player_id)
          return awards.get_dict()
        except Exception as e:
          return {"error": str(e)}
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. It only states the basic action ('Get awards') without mentioning permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what the output contains (though an output schema exists). For a tool with no annotations, 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 highly concise and well-structured: it starts with a clear purpose statement, followed by a brief 'Args' section that explains the parameter. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is reasonably complete. It covers the basic purpose and parameter semantics, though it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral details, which are partially mitigated by the output schema.

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 description adds meaningful context for the single parameter 'player_id' by explaining it as 'The id of the player,' which clarifies its purpose beyond the schema's title 'Player Id.' With 0% schema description coverage, this compensates well, though it could be more detailed (e.g., format examples).

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 tool's purpose: 'Get awards for a player by their ID.' It specifies the verb ('Get') and resource ('awards for a player'), making it easy to understand. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_player_career_stats' or 'get_player_game_log' in terms of what specific data is retrieved, which prevents a perfect score.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid player ID), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'get_player_career_stats' for broader player data. This lack of context leaves the agent with minimal usage direction.

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/stevenyuser/nba_mcp'

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