Skip to main content
Glama

ParlayAPI

by io.github.JacobiusMakes

parlayapi_verdict

Should I bet this? One-call verdict for a specific bet.

Returns the no-vig fair price for the exact bet, the best available price
and which book has it, how the user's price (if given) grades as EV, a
line-shopping nudge, and a plain-English call: BET / LEAN / FAIR / PASS
(or NO_DATA). Use this when a user asks whether a specific bet is worth
making, or whether they're getting a good number, instead of stitching
/ev + /consensus + /best-line yourself.

The best-price / shop recommendation is scoped to books the user can bet
at (default US, so a US bettor is never told to use a euro book). Set it
once with parlayapi_set_bettable_books and it is remembered per key, or
pass region / books here per call.

Args:
    sport: sport_key, e.g. "baseball_mlb".
    side: the team you'd bet (h2h / spreads), or "over" / "under" (totals / props).
    market: h2h | spreads | totals | a player-prop key (player_hits, player_points, ...).
    home, away: the two teams, to identify the game. Or pass `team` with one name.
    team: one team name to find the game (alternative to home + away).
    player: player name (required for player-prop markets).
    line: the number for spreads, totals, or props.
    book: the book you'd bet at (grades that book's current price).
    price: the price you're offered (American like -110, or decimal like 1.91).
        Overrides `book`, use it to grade a specific number in hand.
    region: where you can bet: us (default) | eu | uk | au | ca.
    books: exact CSV of books you can bet at (overrides region; use for
        state-level geo-blocks, e.g. "draftkings,fanduel,novig").
    bankroll: the user's bankroll; when the bet is +EV, returns a suggested
        Kelly stake amount ("bet it, ~$X").
    kelly: Kelly fraction (default 0.5 = half-Kelly, the bankroll-safe standard).

The response also carries an `edge_alert` when a book shows a price far
better than the market (a possible soft error worth grabbing, or a stale
line to verify) that the normal best-price guard would otherwise hide.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
awayNo
bookNo
homeNo
lineNo
sideYes
teamNo
booksNo
kellyNo
priceNo
sportYes
marketNoh2h
playerNo
regionNo
bankrollNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden and discharges it: it details output contents, the bettable-books scoping with a remembered per-key setting, the price-overrides-book behavior, the Kelly stake suggestion, and the edge_alert for anomalous prices. It also implies no bet placement by framing the result as a recommendation.

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?

Although long, the length is justified by 14 parameters and no schema descriptions. The hook, output summary, use-when guidance, Args block, and edge_alert note are each information-dense and front-loaded; there is no filler.

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 high-complexity tool with no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description is complete: it explains the verdict categories, parameter semantics, defaults, scoping/state, and special edge_alert behavior. An output schema exists, and the description also summarizes key return fields, so an agent has enough to select and call the tool correctly.

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 must explain all 14 parameters, and it does: each Args entry includes meaning, format, defaults, and cross-parameter interactions (team vs home/away, price overrides book, books overrides region). Examples like '-110 or 1.91' and 'draftkings,fanduel,novig' add usability beyond 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 states a clear verb plus resource: it gives a one-call BET/LEAN/FAIR/PASS verdict for a specific bet, listing concrete outputs (fair price, best price/book, EV grade, line-shopping nudge). It also differentiates from sibling analysis tools by saying it replaces stitching /ev, /consensus, and /best-line together.

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 says 'Use this when a user asks whether a specific bet is worth making, or whether they're getting a good number' and contrasts with assembling the result manually from other tools. This is clear when-to-use 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 ParlayAPI toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools map to distinct workflows (raw odds, best-line, EV scan, arb, middle, single-bet grade, parlay grade), but several pairs are easy to mix up: find_ev vs best_bets both surface +EV opportunities, live_sports vs list_sports differ only in 'live', and verdict vs parlay_verdict have near-identical names. The detailed descriptions resolve most ambiguity, so it is not chaotic, but the boundaries are not all crisp.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names share the parlayapi_ prefix and snake_case, but the suffix style is inconsistent: some are verb-led (get_odds, find_arbitrage, set_bettable_books) and many are bare noun phrases (consensus, verdict, source_quality, magic_link). The live_* and best_* groups are internally consistent, but pairs like list_sports/live_sports and verdict/parlay_verdict add confusion.

Tool Count3/5

22 tools is on the heavy side for an MCP server, even though the sports-betting domain is broad. Each tool has a plausible purpose, but the public demo/metadata tools (live_command_center, book_coverage, source_quality, live_sports) could probably be consolidated or separated.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the core domain well: sport discovery, game odds, props, consensus, best-line, EV, arbitrage, middles, single-bet verdicts, parlay verdicts, and account/signup flows. Minor gaps exist (no explicit book/market metadata list, no historical odds, no betting-account history), but agents can usually work around them.

Resources