FPL Copilot

Rate my team

rate_my_team

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when a Fantasy Premier League (FPL, fantasy football) manager wants their team rated or reviewed, or shares their team ID or FPL link without saying more. Scores the squad 0-100 against the best possible squad over the next 5 gameweeks and lists the biggest fixes, naming the players; pass their team ID or FPL link, or the player names read from a screenshot of their team.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "rate_my_team"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`captain`	No	Captain's name, if known
`players`	No	11-15 FPL player names (e.g. read from a screenshot of their team), used when there is no team ID. Add the club to disambiguate, e.g. 'Palmer CHE'.
`team_id`	No	The manager's FPL team ID (entry ID), or any FPL link containing /entry/<id>/. Leave empty if unknown.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 2, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / captain / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "maxLength": 40,
-    "minLength": 1,
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "maxLength": 60,
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

changedInput schema / properties / players / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "items": {
-      "maxLength": 40,
-      "minLength": 1,
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "maxItems": 15,
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "items": {
+      "maxLength": 60,
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "maxItems": 20,
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

First observedSep 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the safety hints in annotations, the description defines the *nature* of the behavior by stating it 'Scores the squad 0-100' and 'lists the biggest fixes,' providing insight into the qualitative output and assessment depth.

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?

The description is efficient, front-loading the context and purpose. While two sentences, every phrase adds value, moving from 'What' to 'When/How,' rather than being a verbose summary.

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?

Given the richness of the annotations and the detailed input schema, the description effectively covers the full context of the tool's operation, output, and use case.

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?

Since schema coverage is 100%, the description's main value lies in providing practical guidance on parameter usage (e.g., using 'player names read from a screenshot' for the players array), which enhances the schema's instructions.

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?

The purpose is extremely clear: to rate or review an FPL team. It specifically mentions the scoring mechanism (0-100) and the goal (listing fixes), distinguishing it from simple list retrieval tools like get_my_team.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It provides explicit usage guidance by stating it is for managers who 'shares their team ID or FPL link without saying more,' defining the exact context for its use.

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

All FPL Copilot 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?