Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

fanduel_sportsbook_player_props

Fetch a player's FanDuel prop markets for upcoming NFL or NBA games, including event, market, selection IDs and current odds; returns empty events when no props are listed.

Instructions

FanDuel Sportsbook player props. Returns a player's prop markets for upcoming games, with event, market and selection ids and the current odds of each selection. A player with no listed props returns an empty events list. Available for NFL and NBA players.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
leagueYesLeague: `nfl`, `nba`
playerYesPlayer slug ending in its id, such as `josh-allen-53775`; take it from the `players` route (`players[].slug`) or `team/roster` (`players[].slug`)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.16

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does a decent job: it declares the read-only nature implicitly, discloses the empty-result behavior ('no listed props returns an empty `events` list'), scopes availability to NFL/NBA, and notes odds are 'current'. It stops short of saying whether odds are a snapshot, whether lines are included, or anything about freshness/caching.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and the return shape; each sentence adds something (content, return keys, empty case, scope). No padding.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description's mention of event/market/selection ids, odds, and the `events` list is doing real work. Combined with the schema's slug guidance, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only odds freshness/line details are unstated.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already explains the player slug format and its source routes plus the league enum. The description adds nothing about parameters beyond restating the NFL/NBA limit, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource: returns a player's prop markets for upcoming games, with event/market/selection ids and odds. That is clearly distinct from player-profile or stats siblings, though it doesn't explicitly name the nearest neighbors (fanduel_sportsbook_market_prices, fanduel_sportsbook_event_players).

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer you call this when you want a specific player's props. There is no statement of when to prefer this over event-level markets or the general market-prices tool, and no prerequisites beyond the NFL/NBA scope note.

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