Macro & Commodities Desk

Convert Probability / Odds

convert_probability

Read-only

Convert between implied probability, American odds, and decimal odds. Give one value and its format and get all three back (American odds carry no commas, e.g. +441 or -200). Use for "what is +150 as a probability", "convert 62% to American odds", "decimal to implied odds".

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": "convert_probability"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`value`	No	The numeric value to convert. Needed for a real answer, with format.
`format`	No	Format of `value`: probability (0–100 %), american (e.g. -200 / +150), or decimal (e.g. 2.5). One of: probability · american · decimal.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sources`	No
`tell_user`	No	Show this sentence to the user first.
`timestamp`	No
`needs_input`	No
`decimal_odds`	No	Decimal odds.
`example_call`	No
`american_odds`	No	American odds, no commas.
`data_freshness`	No
`probability_pct`	No	Implied probability, %.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 24, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedInput schema / properties / value / description

Previous value: -"The numeric value to convert. Needed for a real answer, with format. Accepts a number or a numeric string (\"+150\", \"62%\", \"2.5\")."New value: +"The numeric value to convert. Needed for a real answer, with format."

removedOutput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 15, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / value / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-]

addedInput schema / properties / value / type

Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "string"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedSep 29, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "american_odds": {
+      "description": "American odds, no commas."
+    },
+    "data_freshness": {},
+    "decimal_odds": {
+      "description": "Decimal odds."
+    },
+    "example_call": {},
+    "needs_input": {},
+    "probability_pct": {
+      "description": "Implied probability, %."
+    },
+    "sources": {},
+    "tell_user": {
+      "description": "Show this sentence to the user first.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "timestamp": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 29, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / value / description

Previous value: -"The numeric value to convert. Accepts a number or a numeric string (\"+150\", \"62%\", \"2.5\")."New value: +"The numeric value to convert. Needed for a real answer, with format. Accepts a number or a numeric string (\"+150\", \"62%\", \"2.5\")."

removedInput schema / required

Removed value: -[
-  "value",
-  "format"
-]

First observedSep 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description correctly frames this as a pure computation. It adds real behavioral value by specifying that all three representations are returned and by stating the American-odds formatting convention (no commas, e.g. +441 or -200).

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?

Three tight sentences with zero filler: purpose, then round-trip behavior, then invocation examples. The core capability is front-loaded before the examples.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't enumerate return values, and it appropriately just says all three are returned. Minor gap: the accepted ranges/edge cases (e.g. invalid probability bounds) aren't touched, but that's largely covered by the schema's own range note.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by explicitly documenting the accepted American-odds notation ('+441 or -200' with no commas), which the schema does not spell out. It does not otherwise add detail beyond the schema's own format explanation.

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 (convert) and resource (implied probability / American odds / decimal odds), and makes the bidirectional nature explicit ('give one value... get all three back'). This clearly separates it from siblings like calculate_ev or kelly_size, which consume odds rather than convert them.

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?

Three concrete user-intent examples ('what is +150 as a probability', 'convert 62% to American odds', 'decimal to implied odds') make it obvious when to reach for this tool. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or exclusion conditions, so it lands just below the top mark.

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

All Macro & Commodities Desk 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.