Skip to main content
Glama

PropLine — Sports Betting Odds & Prop Resolution

by io.github.proplineapi

Get graded prop results

propline_get_event_results
Read-onlyIdempotent

Pro-tier endpoint. Returns graded prop outcomes for a completed event — every Over/Under marked won, lost, push, or void with the actual stat value next to the line. The single most distinctive feature vs the-odds-api: they don't grade props at any tier. Free tier returns the same structure with resolution and actual_value redacted plus an upgrade pointer.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
event_idYes
sport_keyYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description adds valuable behavioral details: tier-dependence, data redaction on free tier, the specific grading outcomes included, and the presence of actual stat values. It also mentions the upgrade pointer, giving a clear picture of response variations without requiring an output schema.

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 concise at three sentences, front-loaded with the main action. However, the opening fragment 'Pro-tier endpoint.' is grammatically incomplete, and the second sentence about the-odds-api, while informative, is somewhat tangential to operational usage. Overall, it is efficient with no fluff.

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 simple schema (2 required params) and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: return content, tier limits, and redaction behavior. It does not address error conditions or parameter formats, but these are less critical for such a straightforward read tool. The description is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand the tool's role.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the meaning or format of event_id and sport_key. It only implies event_id pertains to a 'completed event,' but this is insufficient to compensate for the lack of parameter descriptions. The agent must rely on external knowledge or schema types.

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's function: 'Returns graded prop outcomes for a completed event' with specific grading outcomes (won, lost, push, void) and actual stat values. It differentiates from siblings by highlighting the unique grading capability compared to the-odds-api, making it instantly clear what this tool specifically offers.

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 description provides usage context by noting it is a 'Pro-tier endpoint' and describing free-tier limitations (redacted resolution/actual_value). However, it does not explicitly instruct when to choose this tool over sibling tools like propline_get_odds or propline_get_event_context, leaving the selection inference to the agent.

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
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The tools are mostly distinct by purpose, but several overlap in areas like odds retrieval (get_odds vs get_best_line vs get_event_ev) and historical data (get_odds_history vs get_odds_closing vs export_odds_history). Descriptions are detailed and clarify distinctions, but the close functional relationships (e.g., get_event_movement vs get_odds_history) may cause selection ambiguity for an agent.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming pattern is largely consistent: propline_<verb>_<noun> with verbs like get, list, export. Most tools follow this structure (e.g., get_event_results, list_events, list_sports). Deviations include 'propline_export_odds_history' (export instead of get) and a few longer names like 'propline_get_mlb_grand_salami' and 'propline_get_nhl_daily_goals_total' that break the simple verb_noun pattern but are still readable. Overall, the naming is predictable with minor exceptions.

Tool Count4/5

With 23 tools for a sports betting odds and prop resolution server, the count is on the higher side but still within a reasonable range given the domain's complexity (odds, EV, movement, results, player trends, webhooks, exports). Each tool serves a distinct function, though some could be consolidated (e.g., grand salami and NHL daily totals could be one). Slightly heavy but not excessive.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the core lifecycle: discover sports and events (list_sports, list_events), retrieve odds and markets (get_odds, list_event_markets), analyze EV and lines (get_event_ev, get_best_line, get_event_movement), track results and player stats (get_event_results, get_event_stats, get_player_history, get_player_trends), and backfill via exports. Missing features include webhook management (deliberately omitted) and possibly batch operations, but the surface is comprehensive for the stated purpose.

Resources