YorkerAPI

Win probability

get_win_probability

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use for a limited-overs match's win-probability worm: our chance the batting side wins at the end of every over (and from team 1's side), with the ten balls that moved it most. Costs 10 credits.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "match_id": "<match_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_win_probability"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`league`	No	League. Defaults to cricket. One of: cricket, test, odi, t20i, ipl, bbl, psl, cpl, blast, hundred, sa20, ilt20, county, wbbl, wpl, hundred_women.
`match_id`	Yes	Match id from get_matches.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes
`overs`	Yes
`method`	Yes
`match_id`	Yes
`team1_id`	Yes
`team2_id`	Yes
`winner_id`	Yes
`biggest_swings`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely non-redundant behavior: per-over granularity, the batting-side and team-1 dual perspective, the top-ten-movers payload, and a concrete cost of 10 credits, which matters for call budgeting. It stops short of covering failure modes or whether the match must be live/completed.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with zero filler: scope, output semantics, perspective, payload and cost in sequence, with 'Use for' leading so the routing signal lands first. The parenthetical is slightly awkward but carries real information.

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-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers scope, payload and cost adequately, so nothing essential is missing for a correct call. The one gap is the unresolved conflict between 'limited-overs match' and a league enum containing 'test', which an agent could stumble on.

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% and match_id already points to get_matches, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds only that the match must be a limited-overs one, and it never reconciles that with the league enum, which includes 'test'.

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 resource and output shape: a per-over win-probability worm for a limited-overs match, plus the ten balls that moved it most. The 'limited-overs' scoping and 'batting side / team 1's side' perspective distinguish it from sibling analytical tools like get_market_vs_model or get_ratings without needing to open a schema.

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 opens with an explicit 'Use for a limited-overs match's...', which tells the agent the condition that selects this tool and implicitly excludes multi-day/test fixtures. It does not name an alternative for the cases it excludes, so the routing guidance stops short of full when/when-not/alternatives coverage.

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

All YorkerAPI 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?