SiteCheck Agent Intel & Dev

ESPN NBA scoreboard for one date: every game with away

dev_espn_nba_scoreboard

Read-only

ESPN NBA scoreboard for one date: every game with away and home team, score, status (scheduled, live, final), venue and current period, from ESPN's public site JSON. Times are UTC. Days without games return an empty list. Related tools on this server, for a different need: dev_espn_mlb_scoreboard when you need ESPN MLB scoreboard for one date: every game with away; dev_espn_nfl_scoreboard when you need ESPN NFL scoreboard for one date: every game with home. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": "dev_espn_nba_scoreboard"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No	Date YYYY-MM-DD (default: yesterday UTC)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No
`count`	No
`games`	No
`source`	No
`checkedAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark this read-only and open-world, so the description's job is to add transactional context, which it does: UTC timestamps, empty list on no-game days, ESPN public JSON as the source, and a pay-per-call model ($0.002 USDC via x402) where failed calls are not charged. The billing detail is exactly the kind of pre-call condition an agent needs and is not in the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence is well front-loaded and information-dense, and the pricing clause earns its place. However, the sibling sentence is visibly auto-generated and truncated ('every game with away'), which reads as filler and costs credibility rather than helping selection.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be restated; the description still covers the edge case (no games yields an empty list), timezone of reported times, data provenance, and cost per call. For a one-parameter read tool this is nearly everything an agent needs before invoking.

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 coverage is 100% and the single 'date' parameter already documents the YYYY-MM-DD format and the yesterday-UTC default, so the description cannot add much there. 'Times are UTC' clarifies output interpretation rather than the parameter itself, so this stays at the schema-carries-it baseline.

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?

States a specific resource and scope (ESPN NBA scoreboard for a single date) and enumerates exactly what each row contains: away/home team, score, status values, venue, current period. That is enough for an agent to tell it apart from season-level siblings such as dev_espn_standings or dev_nba_stats.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It routes to league-specific siblings ('use dev_espn_mlb_scoreboard when...') which is useful, but the routing clauses are garbled template fragments ('every game with away' vs 'every game with home') and nothing selects this tool over same-sport alternatives like dev_nba_stats, dev_sofascore_live or dev_sportsline. Usage is implied by the name rather than reasoned about.

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

All SiteCheck Agent Intel & Dev tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?