SiteCheck Agent Intel & Dev

ESPN NFL scoreboard for one date: every game with home

dev_espn_nfl_scoreboard

Read-only

ESPN NFL scoreboard for one date: every game with home and away team, score, status (scheduled, live, final) and stadium, from ESPN's public site JSON. Regular season and playoffs as ESPN lists them; times are UTC. Related tools on this server, for a different need: dev_espn_nhl_scoreboard when you need ESPN NHL scoreboard for one date: every game with home; dev_espn_mlb_scoreboard when you need ESPN MLB scoreboard for one date: every game with away. 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_nfl_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

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, it discloses genuinely useful behavior: data provenance (ESPN public site JSON), timezone normalization (times are UTC), season coverage (regular season and playoffs as ESPN lists them), and a paid-call requirement ($0.002 USDC via x402, failed calls not charged) that constrains invocation. It is silent on rate limits, caching, or freshness of live scores.

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 purpose is front-loaded, which is good, but the middle 'Related tools ... every game with home / every game with away' fragments are truncated and repetitive noise that adds length without adding routing value.

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 values need not be explained, and the description still covers scope, timezone, source, season coverage, and billing/payment. Combined with a fully documented single parameter and read-only annotations, an agent has what it needs; only the confusing sibling phrasing detracts.

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?

The single parameter has 100% schema description coverage ('Date YYYY-MM-DD (default: yesterday UTC)'), so the schema already carries the semantics. The description only restates 'for one date' and adds no format or edge-case detail (e.g., how far back history is available) beyond the 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 names a specific verb and resource ('ESPN NFL scoreboard for one date') and enumerates the payload fields (home/away team, score, status, stadium), so an agent can immediately tell it apart from the NHL/MLB scoreboard siblings and from stats-oriented tools like dev_nfl_stats.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It explicitly routes to sibling scoreboard tools ('for a different need: dev_espn_nhl_scoreboard ... dev_espn_mlb_scoreboard'), giving clear selection context by sport. It does not, however, distinguish itself from other NFL data sources on the server (dev_nfl_stats, dev_pro_football_reference, dev_sportsline), nor state when-not-to-use it.

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?