Skip to main content
Glama
zafronix

World Cup History MCP

get_bracket

Retrieve the complete knockout bracket for any FIFA World Cup tournament. Includes all matches from Round of 16 to Final with teams and results.

Instructions

Full knockout bracket for a tournament — Round of 16 through Final, with each match's teams + result. Use this for "show me the 2014 World Cup bracket" or "trace France's 2018 path to the title".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearYesTournament year

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for get_bracket: calls the API endpoint /bracket?year={year} with the given year argument.
    handler: async (args: { year: number }) => api(`/bracket?year=${args.year}`),
  • The Zod schema for get_bracket: validates a required 'year' parameter (integer, 1930-2030).
    schema: z.object({
      year: z.number().int().min(1930).max(2030).describe('Tournament year'),
    }).strict(),
  • src/index.ts:320-330 (registration)
    The tool registration entry in the 'tools' array, defining name 'get_bracket', description, schema, and handler.
    {
      name: 'get_bracket',
      description:
        'Full knockout bracket for a tournament — Round of 16 through Final, with each ' +
        'match\'s teams + result. Use this for "show me the 2014 World Cup bracket" or ' +
        '"trace France\'s 2018 path to the title".',
      schema: z.object({
        year: z.number().int().min(1930).max(2030).describe('Tournament year'),
      }).strict(),
      handler: async (args: { year: number }) => api(`/bracket?year=${args.year}`),
    },
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses scope (Round of 16 through Final) and content (teams + results). However, it omits operational details like whether it always returns full bracket or if results are always available, and does not mention any authorization or rate limits.

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?

Two sentences: first defines tool output precisely, second provides concrete usage examples. No wasted words, information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

For a simple single-parameter tool without output schema, description adequately covers purpose and usage. Could be more complete by noting potential limitations (e.g., only works for years with valid tournaments), but overall sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter description 'Tournament year'. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states tool returns full knockout bracket from Round of 16 through Final with teams and results, and provides specific usage examples like 'show me the 2014 World Cup bracket'. This differentiates it from siblings like get_match (single match) or get_tournament (tournament details).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit usage examples (e.g., 'show me the 2014 World Cup bracket'), indicating when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternative sibling tools, leaving some ambiguity.

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/zafronix/wc-mcp'

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