Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

fanduel_sportsbook_team_roster

Retrieves a FanDuel Sportsbook NFL or NBA team roster with player status and injury designations; filter by roster status, position, or injured players.

Instructions

FanDuel Sportsbook team roster and injuries. Returns a team's roster with each player's roster status (for example ACT, PRA, IR, IRD, UFA, TWO-WAY) and injury_status (observed Q and O; empty when healthy). statuses, injury_statuses and positions count the whole roster so valid filter values are discoverable. Available for the NFL and NBA only.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
teamYesTeam slug from the `teams` route (`groups[].teams[].slug`), such as `arizona-cardinals`
leagueYesLeague: `nfl`, `nba`, `mlb`, `college-football`, `college-basketball`
statusNoKeep only this roster status code, such as `IR`; valid codes are listed in the response `statuses`
positionNoKeep only this position code, such as `QB`; valid codes are listed in the response `positions`
injured_onlyNoReturn only players with an injury designation; default false

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.16

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the whole burden and does a decent job: it discloses the response payload shape (roster rows with roster and injury status codes), that `injured_only` defaults to false, and that `statuses`/`injury_statuses`/`positions` are whole-roster counts so filter values are discoverable. It says nothing about pagination, result size, or freshness of injury data, which are the remaining behavioral gaps.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then payload, then filter discoverability, then league scope. Every sentence carries information, though the long code enumeration (`ACT`, `PRA`, `IR`…) is slightly heavy relative to the rest.

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?

For a 5-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies what an agent actually needs: what is returned, what the status fields mean, how to discover valid filter values, and the real league coverage. The `team` slug provenance is handled in the schema, so nothing material is missing.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema: it explains that the filter code lists are computed over the entire roster (not the filtered subset), which is the non-obvious part of choosing `status` / `position` / `injured_only` values. The `league` narrowing to NFL/NBA also reinterprets the broader enum.

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?

It names the resource and the verb precisely — 'FanDuel Sportsbook team roster and injuries' — and then states exactly what each returned player carries (`status` and `injury_status`). That is a clear, specific purpose, but it never contrasts itself with the many sibling roster tools (espn_team_roster, mlb_team_roster, yahoo_sports_team_roster, draftkings_team), so sibling differentiation is left to the name.

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?

It gives an explicit scope restriction — 'Available for the NFL and NBA only' — which is real when-not guidance an agent would otherwise get wrong given the broader enum. It does not point at alternative tools for MLB/college or for related needs like depth charts, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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