infersports

Scan Slate

scan_slate

Read-only

Scan today's whole slate in ONE call — each fixture with honest status + value/arb signal.

The batch alternative to looping find_match → get_sharp_line per match. Returns every fixture in
the filter with its status (finished is excluded from "live"), live score/clock, and a
pre-computed value/arb signal; value/arb matches are sorted to the top and the list is truncated
to ``limit`` (so truncation drops the quiet ones). Line movement is NOT included (that needs the
opening lookup) — drill into a single fixture with get_opening_line. DETECTION ONLY / read-only.

Args:
    sport: optional filter — "football" or "basketball".
    status: optional filter — "live" | "scheduled" | "finished".
    league: optional league filter — a name (fuzzy-matched, e.g. "World Cup") or an external id (lg_…).
    markets: optional — limit the value/arb scan to "1x2"/"asian_handicap"/"totals" (default all).
    period: optional — "full_time" or "half_time" (default both).
    min_edge_pct: value threshold for the per-match signal (default 1.0).
    min_margin_pct: arbitrage threshold for the per-match signal (default 0.0).
    only_signal: if true, return only fixtures that have a value or arb signal.
    format: odds format — decimal | hk | malay | american | indonesian | probability.
    limit: max entries to return, signal-first (default 20, max 100).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`limit`	No
`sport`	No
`format`	No	decimal
`league`	No
`period`	No
`status`	No
`markets`	No
`only_signal`	No
`min_edge_pct`	No
`min_margin_pct`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJun 7, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses meaningful runtime behavior: results are sorted by value/arb signal, truncated to the limit by dropping quiet matches, 'finished is excluded from live', and line movement is intentionally excluded. It also clearly labels itself 'DETECTION ONLY / read-only'.

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 long because it must document 10 parameters, but every sentence earns its place. It is front-loaded with purpose and behavior, then flows into an organized parameter list with defaults and allowed values. There is no filler or redundant explanation.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately explains what the tool returns — each fixture with status, live score/clock, and a pre-computed value/arb signal — plus sorting and truncation rules. It also covers all filter semantics, defaults, and the line-movement exclusion, so an agent has enough information to call it correctly without external knowledge.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description carries the full burden for parameters. The Args block documents all 10 parameters with allowed values, defaults, semantic meaning, and examples (e.g., league fuzzy matching, format types, min thresholds, only_signal behavior). This fully compensates for the bare schema.

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 description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Scan today's whole slate in ONE call') and immediately states its value proposition. It names the sibling alternatives it replaces ('batch alternative to looping find_match → get_sharp_line per match'), making it easy to distinguish from related tools.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool — as the batch alternative to looping find_match and get_sharp_line — and when to go elsewhere: line movement is not includedrings and requires get_opening_line. This is direct, actionable routing guidance with named alternatives.

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

All infersports 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?