Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

PropLine — Sports Betting Odds & Prop Resolution

by io.github.proplineapi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get market-implied projections

propline_get_event_projections
Read-onlyIdempotent

Market-implied consensus projection per (market, player) for an event: the line where the no-vig P(over) crosses 50%, median across contributing sportsbooks. Use it to validate statistical or fantasy projections against the live market. These are MARKET-IMPLIED values derived purely from sportsbook prices — never a forecast, and no accuracy claim is made; present them as 'the market implies X', not 'PropLine projects X'. DFS pick'em pricing is excluded; each row carries books_contributing and a stable player_id (null until the player has graded). Hobby+ for values; free tier gets the structure redacted.

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": {
      "sport_key": "<sport_key>",
      "event_id": "<event_id>"
    },
    "name": "propline_get_event_projections"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
marketsNoComma-separated market keys, e.g. 'player_pass_yds,player_receptions'.
event_idYes
sport_keyYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

While annotations cover read-only/idempotent safety, the description adds essential behavioral context beyond them: the values are market-implied with no accuracy claim, not a forecast, player_id is null until graded, and tier differences in output. This fully discloses the behavior and limitations.

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 description is dense but every sentence earns its place: definition, use case, interpretation warning, exclusions, and tier info. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, and the structure flows logically from what to how to constraints.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description covers output semantics (no-vig cross, books_contributing, player_id null until graded), exclusions, and tier restrictions well. Minor gaps include not explaining what 'Hobby+' tiers mean or how event_id/sport_key should be formatted, but these are likely standard to the API.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 33% (only 'markets' has a description), yet the description doesn't clarify 'sport_key' or 'event_id' beyond their names. It mentions the output is per (market, player) but provides no format or allowable values for the required parameters, failing to compensate for the schema gaps.

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 clearly states the tool returns market-implied consensus projections per (market, player) for an event, with a precise definition (no-vig P(over) crossing 50%, median across sportsbooks). This is specific and distinct from sibling tools like odds or EV, making its purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says to use it to validate statistical or fantasy projections against the live market, and warns how to present results ('the market implies X', not 'PropLine projects X'). It also notes the DFS exclusion, giving both positive and negative guidance without naming alternatives directly.

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

All PropLine — Sports Betting Odds & Prop Resolution 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