FormFav Horse & Greyhound Racing

Get track barrier bias

get_track_bias

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get barrier/box bias statistics for a track (Pro tier).

Returns win rates by barrier position with advantage scores (win-rate points
above/below expected, 0-1 scale). For greyhounds, barrier numbers represent
box positions (1-8).

By default the response also carries `distanceStats`: the same barrier
breakdown per distance band at that track (gallops: Sprint <1400m / Mile /
Middle / Classic / Staying ≤3200m / Marathon (jumps); harness: Mile/Middle/Staying/Long;
greyhounds: Sprint/Medium/Distance), shortest band first. Barrier bias is
usually distance-specific, so prefer the band — or a `distance` scope — over
the whole-track figures when advising on a particular race.

Args:
    track: Track/venue name (e.g. 'flemington', 'randwick').
    race_code: Race type — 'gallops' (default), 'harness', or 'greyhounds'.
    country: Country code — 'au' (default), 'nz', 'hk', 'gb'.
    window: Optional rolling window in days (14-365) for recent stats.
    condition: Optional track condition filter (e.g. 'Good', 'Soft', 'Heavy'). Only applies with window.
    distance: Optional metres scope — one distance ('1200') or an inclusive range
        ('1200-1600'). Scopes the top-level report and recentStats to those races;
        `distanceFilter` echoes it and `distanceStats` holds one 'Custom' entry for
        the slice (its minDistance/maxDistance are the distances actually found).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`track`	Yes
`window`	No
`country`	No	au
`distance`	No
`condition`	No
`race_code`	No	gallops

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), yet the description adds substantial behavioral detail: return contents (win rates by barrier, advantage scores on a 0-1 scale), the default `distanceStats` payload and its band definitions per race code, greyhound box semantics, and the `distanceFilter` echo. This goes well beyond what structured fields disclose.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose, then a well-organized Args block. It is long, but nearly every sentence carries domain information that the 0%-coverage schema cannot, so the length is largely earned; the per-race-code band enumerations are the densest part.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 6-parameter, single-required-arg tool with no schema descriptions, this is complete: purpose, tier gate, all parameter meanings, and default response shape are all present. Return values are additionally described even though an output schema exists.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does: track with concrete examples, race_code and country with their accepted values and defaults, window range (14-365), condition examples plus the constraint that it only applies with window, and the distance syntax including inclusive range format and its effect on the response.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get barrier/box bias statistics for a track') and immediately scopes it as Pro tier. This is clearly distinct from sibling tools like get_jockey_stats or get_trainer_stats without opening any schema.

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?

Gives a real usage rule — prefer the distance band or a `distance` scope over whole-track figures when advising on a particular race — plus a Pro-tier prerequisite. It does not, however, route the agent among sibling tools or say when a barrier-bias lookup is appropriate versus other stats tools.

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

All FormFav Horse & Greyhound Racing tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?