Skip to main content
Glama

Prediction Markets Quant

by com.predictionmarketspicks
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

NFL Power Ratings (PWR)

nfl_power_ratings
Read-only

The PredictionMarketsPicks NFL power ratings — PWR for all 32 teams: points per game above an average team on a neutral field, where PWR = Off PR + Def PR + ST PR. Includes each team's rank and tier. Use for "best NFL teams by power rating", "NFL power rankings 2026", "is Baltimore overrated", "how good is Kansas City", "NFL team ratings".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
teamNoOptional team abbreviation (e.g. "KC", "SF", "LAR") — returns just that team's rating + rank.
tierNoOptional: only teams in this tier — one of "Elite" (PWR ≥+7), "Contender" (≥+4), "Playoff" (≥+1), "Average" (≥−2), "Below Avg" (≥−5), "Rebuild" (<−5). A tier with no teams at current ratings returns an empty board, not an error.
limitNoMax teams to return, best rating first (default 32 = full board). Values above 32 are clamped to 32.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
as_ofNoWhen the ratings were generated.
countNoTeams returned.
teamsNoRank, team, PWR (points per game above average, neutral field) and tier.
seasonNoSeason.
sourcesNo
tell_userNoShow this sentence to the user first.
timestampNo
needs_inputNo
example_callNo
data_freshnessNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "anyOf": [
-      {
-        "type": "number"
-      },
-      {
-        "type": "string"
-      }
-    ]
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / type
      Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "anyOf": [
+      {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / default
      Removed value: -32
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Max teams to return, best rating first (default 32 = full board)."New value: +"Max teams to return, best rating first (default 32 = full board). Values above 32 are clamped to 32."
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
      Removed value: -32
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / minimum
      Removed value: -1
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / type
      Removed value: -"integer"
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "as_of": {
+      "description": "When the ratings were generated."
+    },
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Teams returned."
+    },
+    "data_freshness": {},
+    "example_call": {},
+    "needs_input": {},
+    "season": {
+      "description": "Season."
+    },
+    "sources": {},
+    "teams": {
+      "description": "Rank, team, PWR (points per game above average, neutral field) and tier."
+    },
+    "tell_user": {
+      "description": "Show this sentence to the user first.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "timestamp": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: the exact meaning of the returned number, and that rank and tier are bundled in. It stops short of noting empty-result or clamping behavior in prose (those live in the schema).

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-loads the resource and metric definition, then the usage examples. The example-query list is slightly long but each phrase maps to a real lookup pattern, so nothing is truly wasted.

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 explain return values, annotations cover the safety profile, and all three parameters are documented. It supplies the metric definition an agent needs to interpret results; only minor gaps (empty-board behavior in prose) remain.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents team, tier, and limit (including tier thresholds and the clamping rule). The description adds no parameter syntax or format detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 is correct.

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?

States a specific resource (NFL power ratings / PWR for all 32 teams) and defines the metric precisely, including the PWR = Off PR + Def PR + ST PR formula and that rank and tier are included. It does not name or contrast a sibling tool, so it stops short of the sibling-differentiation bar for a 5.

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?

The 'Use for ...' clause gives concrete triggering queries ('best NFL teams by power rating', 'is Baltimore overrated'), which is clear usage context. It offers no exclusions or explicit pointers to alternative siblings, so it is a solid 4 rather than a 5.

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

All Prediction Markets Quant toolsInspect
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