Skip to main content
Glama

HSH Data-on-Demand

by io.github.hshintelligence
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

hsh-cricket-first-winprob

Win probability for the side batting first in a men's T20, while the total is being set. On 106 men's T20 internationals played after all its training data (1 Jul to 17 Sep 2026): AUC 0.912 with both team names and the ground, 0.888 with the ground only. Per call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
venueNoThe ground's name as scorecards write it.
wicketsYesWickets lost (0-10).
cum_runsYesRuns scored so far.
balls_bowledYesLegal balls bowled, as a scorecard counts them: 1-120, and 12.3 overs = 75.
chasing_teamNoThe team bowling first, by name. Team strength is used only when both are known.
setting_teamNoThe team batting first, by name (e.g. "India"). Used with chasing_team.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / balls_bowled / description
      Previous value: -""New value: +"Legal balls bowled, as a scorecard counts them: 1-120, and 12.3 overs = 75."
    • removedInput schema / properties / chase_elo
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "",
-  "type": "number"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / chasing_team
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The team bowling first, by name. Team strength is used only when both are known.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / cum_runs / description
      Previous value: -""New value: +"Runs scored so far."
    • removedInput schema / properties / set_elo
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "",
-  "type": "number"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / setting_team
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The team batting first, by name (e.g. \"India\"). Used with chasing_team.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / venue / description
      Previous value: -""New value: +"The ground's name as scorecards write it."
    • changedInput schema / properties / wickets / description
      Previous value: -""New value: +"Wickets lost (0-10)."
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the model's validation performance (AUC 0.912 with team names and ground, 0.888 with ground only) and the evaluation window, which helps an agent understand reliability. It does not describe the output format, but 'win probability' already implies the basic result.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence. The validation statistics are useful but somewhat detailed; 'Per call' is terse and slightly ambiguous, yet the overall structure is efficient.

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?

The description gives enough context for tool selection and mentions model performance, but it does not state the exact return shape (e.g., a probability between 0 and 1) or explicitly clarify that optional team names improve accuracy. It still feels minimally viable given the comprehensive schema.

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 parameters are already well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal extra semantic value beyond confirming that team names and ground are relevant features, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly identifies the tool as returning win probability for the side batting first in a men's T20 while the total is being set. It distinguishes this from the sibling chase-winprob tool by specifying the first-innings context, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'calculates'.

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?

The phrase 'while the total is being set' implies this is for the first innings, and the sibling list includes chase-winprob for the opposite scenario. However, the description never explicitly says when to use this tool instead of alternatives or 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 HSH Data-on-Demand 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