GridIron Data

Official game-day inactives

get_inactives

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns the NFL's official game-day inactives for a week (default the newest week published), by team, with gsis, espn, sleeper and pfr ids. Published after the games, usually days later. Use it for audits and backtesting, not as a pre-kickoff list (teams_published vs teams_played shows how complete the week is). Pro plan (Free and Basic keys get 403 pro_required).

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": "get_inactives"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`team`	No	Only this team. Team code, e.g. BUF or KC. LA/LAR, WSH/WAS and JAC/JAX are interchangeable.
`week`	No	Week 1-22 (19+ are playoffs). Default: the newest week with inactives published.
`season`	No	Season year, 2020 or later. Default: the current season.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	Notes about the data.
`team`	No	Team filter.
`week`	No	The week returned.
`count`	No	Inactive players returned.
`error`	No	Present only when the call failed: what went wrong.
`reason`	No	Machine-readable failure reason, e.g. basic_required or pro_required.
`season`	No	Season.
`source`	No	Attribution: nflverse, CC-BY-4.0.
`status`	No	HTTP status of the failed API call.
`inactives`	No	Inactive players by team, with gsis, espn, sleeper and pfr ids.
`loaded_at`	No	When GridIron last loaded the data.
`upgrade_url`	No	Where to see the plans.
`teams_played`	No	Teams whose game that week is final; the week is complete when they match.
`required_plan`	No	The plan that unlocks this data: basic or pro.
`teams_published`	No	Teams with inactives published for the week so far.
`weeks_available`	No	Weeks with inactives published.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare it read-only, idempotent and non-open-world; the description adds behavior the annotations cannot express: publication latency of days after games, a plan-gate that yields a 403 pro_required error, and the teams_published vs teams_played completeness signal for gauging whether a week is fully populated. These are exactly the operational caveats an agent needs before relying on the data.

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: what it returns first, then the timing caveat, then the usage guidance and plan gate. Every clause carries information — identifiers, latency, completeness field, error code — with no filler or repetition.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, yet the description still names the id systems included. For a read-only, zero-required-parameter tool, the latency, completeness indicator, and plan gate cover everything needed to call it correctly and interpret gaps.

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 already documents team codes, the 1-22 week range with playoffs at 19+, and the season format and defaults. The description reiterates the newest-week default and team grouping but adds no syntax or format detail beyond that. With the schema doing the heavy lifting, the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 — 'Returns the NFL's official game-day inactives for a week' — and immediately bounds scope (default newest week, by team) plus the id spaces returned (gsis, espn, sleeper, pfr). No sibling tool covers inactives, so an agent can route here unambiguously. The stated granularity and identifiers make the purpose unmistakable.

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 gives an explicit when — 'Use it for audits and backtesting' — and an explicit when-not — 'not as a pre-kickoff list' — with the reason supplied ('Published after the games, usually days later'). It also states the access precondition (Pro plan; Free/Basic keys get 403 pro_required), so the agent knows both the appropriate use and the failure mode.

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

All GridIron Data 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?