Skip to main content
Glama

PropLine — Sports Betting Odds & Prop Resolution

by io.github.proplineapi

List webhooks

propline_list_webhooks
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the API key's webhook subscriptions (Streaming Lite tier and up; other tiers get a 403 with an upgrade URL). Read-only: signing secrets are always masked, and this server deliberately has no create/update/delete tools — manage subscriptions via the REST API or SDKs. Each row shows url, subscribed events (line_movement, resolution, steam, market_suspended), filters and active status. Use this first to find the webhook id for propline_get_webhook_deliveries.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: signing secrets are always masked, the server deliberately lacks management tools, and the tier-based 403 behavior with an upgrade URL. Even though readOnlyHint is already set, the extra details about masking and tier restrictions enrich the agent's understanding, going beyond the minimal annotation coverage.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence adds critical information: scope, tier behavior, read-only nature, output fields, and usage pointer. No wasted words or redundancy, making it highly concise and well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has no parameters, no output schema, but has robust annotations, the description is complete. It covers purpose, restrictions, behavior, output fields, and a specific use case, leaving no gaps for the agent. It fully equips the agent to invoke the tool appropriately.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With zero parameters, the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, but it does describe the output fields (url, subscribed events, filters, active status), which is relevant. Since there are no parameters, no further semantic clarification is required.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: 'List the API key's webhook subscriptions.' It specifies the resource and scope, and differentiates it from siblings by noting the tier restriction and the absence of management tools, making it easy to distinguish from the other tools.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Use this first to find the webhook id for propline_get_webhook_deliveries.' It also covers when the tool works (Streaming Lite and up) and when it doesn't (403 response for lower tiers), plus points out that create/update/delete are handled via REST API/SDKs, leaving no ambiguity about when to use this tool.

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