tablepredict_list_competitionsList competitions currently configured in TablePredict, including season, prediction mode, roster size, cutoff, and predictor URL. Call this before requesting a roster or building a prediction link. Returns no user data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| total | Yes | ||
| competitions | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / properties / competitions / items / properties / acceptingPredictions / descriptionAdded value: +"Legacy preseason availability flag. False does not rule out domestic late entry; use entryStatus."Output schema / properties / competitions / items / properties / entryStatusAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Check live late-entry eligibility and penalties at predictorUrl; the catalog does not read member entries.",
+ "enum": [
+ "preseason",
+ "check_late_entry_on_site",
+ "closed"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / competitions / items / properties / predictionLockAt / descriptionAdded value: +"Preseason editing cutoff, not the domestic late-entry deadline."Output schema / properties / competitions / items / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "id",
- "name",
- "country",
- "season",
- "mode",
- "teamCount",
- "predictionLockAt",
- "acceptingPredictions",
- "predictorUrl"
-]New value: +[
+ "id",
+ "name",
+ "country",
+ "season",
+ "mode",
+ "teamCount",
+ "predictionLockAt",
+ "acceptingPredictions",
+ "entryStatus",
+ "predictorUrl"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful context by stating 'Returns no user data' and clarifying that it lists currently configured competitions, which supplements the annotation set.
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 two sentences with zero filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then provides essential usage context, making it maximally efficient.
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?
For a zero-parameter read-only tool with an output schema available, the description covers what is listed, when to call it, and a relevant behavioral note. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.
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 schema coverage is trivially 100%, so the description need not explain parameters. No parameter information is missing, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools is satisfied.
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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('competitions currently configured in TablePredict') and enumerates the exact fields returned. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings that build prediction links or fetch competition teams.
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?
Explicitly instructs to call this tool before requesting a roster or building a prediction link, naming the relevant sibling operations. This gives clear when-to-use guidance with no ambiguity.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct responsibility: listing competitions, fetching team names, and building prediction links. There is no meaningful overlap between them, and the descriptions reinforce their unique roles.
All tool names follow the same snake_case pattern with the consistent tablepredict_ prefix and a clear verb_noun structure: list_competitions, get_competition_teams, build_prediction_link. This makes the API predictable and easy to navigate.
Three tools is appropriate for this focused server: discover competitions, retrieve teams, and generate a prediction link. Each tool is necessary for the intended workflow with no redundant entries.
The tool set covers the full prediction-link generation workflow: list available competitions, get canonical team names, then build and validate the link. The descriptions intentionally scope out account management and publishing, so there are no obvious dead ends for the stated purpose.