Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

puntersedge

by io.github.Propertyscout001
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Race market intelligence

race_intelligence
Read-onlyIdempotent

A one-race market read: consensus at each mark, how the market has moved, which books lead or lag, and the signals PuntersEdge derives from them. Costs 3 credits. Every plan.

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": "race_intelligence"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
venueNoVenue name as the feeds spell it, case-insensitive, e.g. Randwick or Sandown Hillside.
countryNoTwo-letter country of the meeting. Only needed when two meetings share a venue name on one day (Ascot in Perth and in Berkshire).
race_idNorace_id from odds_board, race_card, race_results or the archive. The most reliable way to name a race.
min_booksNo
race_numberNo
meeting_dateNoMeeting day, YYYY-MM-DD, Australian Eastern time.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe API response, with links and empty fields removed.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-schema context: the call costs 3 credits and is available on every plan. It stops short of describing rate-limit or freshness behavior for the underlying market data.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the substantive content and followed by the cost/availability note. Nothing redundant, though 'at each mark' is mildly jargon-laden for an agent without racing-domain grounding.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return-shape explanation is unnecessary, and the description covers what categories of data come back plus cost. However, for a six-parameter intelligence tool it omits selection guidance against the many overlapping siblings and leaves two parameters undocumented, so an agent still has avoidable ambiguity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 67%, leaving min_books and race_number with no explanation anywhere. The description does not compensate, giving no guidance on how min_books filters books or when race_number plus meeting_date is preferable to race_id. It only reinforces the per-race scope already implied by the schema.

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?

The description names a specific resource and scope (a one-race market read) and enumerates its contents: consensus at each mark, market movement, leading/lagging books, and PuntersEdge-derived signals. It is clearly not a tautology, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings such as consensus_price, market_movers, or market_summary.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no named alternative, and no preconditions. 'Every plan' tells the agent about availability, not about when this tool beats race_odds, market_summary, or consensus_price for a given question.

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

All puntersedge 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