SiteCheck Agent Intel & Dev

Fantasy Premier League player stats from the official FPL

dev_fpl_premier_league

Read-only

Fantasy Premier League player stats from the official FPL data feed: the top players by total points with team, position, goals, assists, form, price in £m and percentage of managers who selected them. Current season as FPL serves it. Related tools on this server, for a different need: dev_nrl_rugby_league_stats when you need NRL Telstra Premiership ladder for a season from the NRL. 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_fpl_premier_league"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	How many players, 1 to 25 (default 10)
`position`	No	Optional: Goalkeeper, Defender, Midfielder or Forward

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No
`source`	No
`players`	No
`position`	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?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: a $0.002 USDC charge per successful call via x402 on Base, Solana or Arc, with failed calls not billed. It also warns that the season is whatever FPL currently serves, which flags freshness limits. Missing only detail like ranking cut-off behavior or whether the paid call can be retried.

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?

The core capability is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by season scoping, the sibling pointer, and the pricing note. Every sentence carries distinct information with no repetition of the title or schema.

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?

For a two-optional-parameter read tool with an output schema, the definition covers purpose, freshness, cost, and failure billing. The only gap is that the output schema already enumerates fields, so the long field list in the description is somewhat redundant, and no guidance is given on choosing this over same-domain soccer siblings.

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%, so both parameters (limit 1-25, position enum values) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning about how limit interacts with ranking or how position filters the top-N list, so it sits at the 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 (Fantasy Premier League player stats), its source (the official FPL data feed), and the exact shape of the result: top players by total points with team, position, goals, assists, form, price in £m and ownership percentage. An agent can distinguish this from the other soccer/stats siblings without opening the schema.

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 explicitly scopes the data ('Current season as FPL serves it') and names one alternative with a condition, but that alternative (dev_nrl_rugby_league_stats) is a different sport, so it does not help route between this and the many same-domain siblings like dev_fbref, dev_understat_xg or dev_espn_soccer_scoreboard. Usage is implied rather than prescribed.

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?