Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

espn_game_summary

Fetch one ESPN game's matchup, betting odds, and boxscore stat totals with sport, league, and event ID; use it to get structured public game data.

Instructions

ESPN game summary. Returns one game's matchup, betting odds, and boxscore stat totals from ESPN's credential-free public JSON. The sport enum accepts football, basketball, baseball, hockey, and soccer. The league enum accepts nfl, college-football, nba, wnba, mens-college-basketball, womens-college-basketball, mlb, nhl, eng.1, esp.1, ita.1, ger.1, fra.1, usa.1, and uefa.champions; it must be valid for the chosen sport. Get an event id from the scoreboard endpoint.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eventYesNumeric ESPN event (game) id
sportYesSport key
leagueYesLeague key (must be valid for the sport)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.17.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / league / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "nfl",
+  "college-football",
+  "nba",
+  "wnba",
+  "mens-college-basketball",
+  "womens-college-basketball",
+  "mlb",
+  "nhl",
+  "eng.1",
+  "esp.1",
+  "ita.1",
+  "ger.1",
+  "fra.1",
+  "usa.1",
+  "uefa.champions"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / sport / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "football",
+  "basketball",
+  "baseball",
+  "hockey",
+  "soccer"
+]
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavior-disclosure burden. It usefully notes the data source is 'ESPN's credential-free public JSON' and lists the returned content types. It does not, however, describe response shape, failure behavior, or read-only semantics beyond the word 'Returns.'

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded and the prose is clear, but a substantial portion of the description is spent re-listing enum values that already appear in the input schema. This is not egregious, but it adds length without adding much signal.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description's mention of 'matchup, betting odds, and boxscore stat totals' helps set expectations. It also covers all three required parameters and explains where the event id comes from. For a moderately simple three-parameter tool, this is reasonably complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful workflow context by telling the agent to source the `event` id from the scoreboard endpoint and by emphasizing the league/sport validity constraint. It largely repeats the enum lists already present in the schema, but the added sourcing guidance improves correct invocation.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Returns one game's matchup, betting odds, and boxscore stat totals.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from espn_scoreboard and other espn_* siblings by emphasizing the single-game summary scope.

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?

The description gives clear workflow context: 'Get an event id from the scoreboard endpoint.' This implicitly directs the agent to use espn_scoreboard first and then this tool for details. It does not explicitly enumerate when-not-to-use scenarios, but the guidance is strong enough for correct selection.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools