Skip to main content
Glama

Squiggle

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Standings

standings
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch the AFL ladder (standings) for a given year and optional round from Squiggle; returns wins, losses, points, and percentage for each team.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearNo
roundNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
standingsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties / count
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Number of items returned.",
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / items
      Removed value: -{
-  "items": {
-    "properties": {
-      "losses": {
-        "description": "Number of losses",
-        "type": "number"
-      },
-      "points": {
-        "description": "Competition points",
-        "type": "number"
-      },
-      "position": {
-        "description": "Ladder position",
-        "type": "number"
-      },
-      "team": {
-        "description": "Team name",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "wins": {
-        "description": "Number of wins",
-        "type": "number"
-      }
-    },
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "type": "array"
-}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / standings
      Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "against": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "behinds_against": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "behinds_for": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "draws": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "for": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "goals_against": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "goals_for": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "id": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "losses": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "name": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "percentage": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "played": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "pts": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "rank": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "wins": {
+        "type": "number"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • removedOutput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "items",
-  "count"
-]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "round": 10,
+    "year": 2024
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Number of items returned.",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "items": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "losses": {
+            "description": "Number of losses",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "points": {
+            "description": "Competition points",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "position": {
+            "description": "Ladder position",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "team": {
+            "description": "Team name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "wins": {
+            "description": "Number of wins",
+            "type": "number"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "items",
+    "count"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already convey read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the data comes from Squiggle and returns specific fields, but does not disclose edge-case behavior such as handling of missing data or default round when omitted. No contradiction with annotations.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main verb and resource, then efficiently adds parameter and output details. There is no redundant or unnecessary wording.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple read-only tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and data source. The major gap is not addressing the overlapping sibling 'ladder' tool, which is essential for correct tool selection. Also, it doesn't mention default behavior for optional round.

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?

The input schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description is the only source of parameter meaning. It explicitly states 'year' and 'optional round', clarifying that round is optional. However, it does not provide constraints or what happens when round is omitted, leaving gaps.

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 'Fetch the AFL ladder' with parameters 'year' and 'optional round', and lists return fields. This is specific and identifies the resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'ladder', which appears to cover similar functionality.

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. No alternatives are mentioned, and with a sibling named 'ladder' that likely overlaps, the agent has no criteria for selecting this tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Squiggle toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools occupy overlapping boundaries: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are near-duplicate query entry points (beta is currently identical), while ladder/standings, ai_visibility_check/scan_competitor_ai_presence, and polymarket_edges/polymarket_arbitrage also blur together. An agent would struggle to reliably pick the right tool without reading very long descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of names are snake_case and many follow a readable verb_noun shape, such as resolve_entity, validate_claim, and list_subscriptions. However, the Squiggle/AFL tools are bare nouns (games, ladder, sources, standings, teams, tips), and the polymarket_* / pipeworx_* prefixes do not use one consistent verb style, so it is not a fully uniform convention.

Tool Count2/5

37 tools is in the too-many band, and the sprawl is compounded by mixing unrelated domains under one server: AFL stats, a huge Pipeworx data-routing layer, prediction-market analytics, AI visibility checks, npm dependency review, and llms.txt generation. The set feels like several merged servers rather than one well-scoped MCP.

Completeness3/5

The query/research surface is broad and covers many subdomains, and the subscription lifecycle is reasonably complete with subscribe/list/unsubscribe/recent_alerts. However, pipeworx:// citation URIs are prominently returned but no tool fetches a cited record directly, the AFL side lacks player-level data, and subscriptions cannot be updated.

Resources