Skip to main content
Glama

Fantasy Football Draft Assistant

by com.predictionmarketspicks

Fantasy Draft Board

draft_board
Read-only

The PredictionMarketsPicks 2026 fantasy football draft board (standard, half-PPR or full-PPR) — every player ranked, blending our projection model with consensus ADP, showing projected points, ADP, draft round, and a SLEEPER / BUST value flag. Filter by position (QB/RB/WR/TE/FLEX). THE COMPLETE BOARD IS FREE — all ~330 players, no key, no email, no signup. Pro adds the judgment on top: boom/bust week odds per player and positional tier breaks. Use for "fantasy football rankings 2026", "who are the top RBs", "draft board", "best available by position".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax players to return, best first (default 50). The full board is ~330 and all of it is free.
teamsNoLeague size (number of teams) for draft-round math. Overrides the platform default; falls back to 12.
scoringNoScoring format: standard, half_ppr (default), or ppr (full PPR). Overrides a platform preset. Works for Yahoo/ESPN/Sleeper defaults. One of: standard · half_ppr · ppr.
platformNoLeague platform — applies its default scoring, size, roster + best-ball settings (overridable by explicit scoring/teams). Underdog/DraftKings are best ball. One of: yahoo · espn · sleeper · nfl · cbs · fantrax · draftkings · underdog.
positionNoOptional position filter (FLEX = RB/WR/TE). One of: QB · RB · WR · TE · FLEX.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed12 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / platform / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "enum": [
+      "yahoo",
+      "espn",
+      "sleeper",
+      "nfl",
+      "cbs",
+      "fantrax",
+      "draftkings",
+      "underdog"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / platform / description
      Previous value: -"League platform — applies its default scoring, size, roster + best-ball settings (overridable by explicit scoring/teams). Underdog/DraftKings are best ball."New value: +"League platform — applies its default scoring, size, roster + best-ball settings (overridable by explicit scoring/teams). Underdog/DraftKings are best ball. One of: yahoo · espn · sleeper · nfl · cbs · fantrax · draftkings · underdog."
    • removedInput schema / properties / platform / enum
      Removed value: -[
-  "yahoo",
-  "espn",
-  "sleeper",
-  "nfl",
-  "cbs",
-  "fantrax",
-  "draftkings",
-  "underdog"
-]
    • removedInput schema / properties / platform / type
      Removed value: -"string"
    • addedInput schema / properties / position / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "enum": [
+      "QB",
+      "RB",
+      "WR",
+      "TE",
+      "FLEX"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / position / description
      Previous value: -"Optional position filter (FLEX = RB/WR/TE)."New value: +"Optional position filter (FLEX = RB/WR/TE). One of: QB · RB · WR · TE · FLEX."
    • removedInput schema / properties / position / enum
      Removed value: -[
-  "QB",
-  "RB",
-  "WR",
-  "TE",
-  "FLEX"
-]
    • removedInput schema / properties / position / type
      Removed value: -"string"
    • addedInput schema / properties / scoring / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "enum": [
+      "standard",
+      "half_ppr",
+      "ppr"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / scoring / description
      Previous value: -"Scoring format: standard, half_ppr (default), or ppr (full PPR). Overrides a platform preset. Works for Yahoo/ESPN/Sleeper defaults."New value: +"Scoring format: standard, half_ppr (default), or ppr (full PPR). Overrides a platform preset. Works for Yahoo/ESPN/Sleeper defaults. One of: standard · half_ppr · ppr."
    • removedInput schema / properties / scoring / enum
      Removed value: -[
-  "standard",
-  "half_ppr",
-  "ppr"
-]
    • removedInput schema / properties / scoring / type
      Removed value: -"string"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Max players to return, best first (default 50)."New value: +"Max players to return, best first (default 50). The full board is ~330 and all of it is free."
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
      Previous value: -100New value: +400
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: the board is free, includes ~330 players, can be filtered by position, and exposes projected points, ADP, draft round, and value flags. It also explains that Pro content (boom/bust odds, tier breaks) is not part of the base behavior. This goes beyond the structured annotations.

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 description is front-loaded with the purpose and core features, but it becomes verbose and promotional with 'THE COMPLETE BOARD IS FREE' and the 'Pro adds' pitch. The query examples are useful, but some sentences read like marketing copy rather than functional guidance, making this less concise than it could be.

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?

For a read-only tool with no required parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main things an agent needs: what data is returned, what filters exist, the scoring options, and access constraints. It does not explain when to prefer this over sibling tools, and response shape is unspecified, but the schema covers parameters and the description covers domain intent reasonably well.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents limit, teams, scoring, platform, and position. The description adds some context, such as the ~330 player count and position filter values, but it does not materially improve understanding of parameter semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly identifies the tool as a ranked fantasy football draft board with a specific data model (projection model + consensus ADP) and lists the output fields (projected points, ADP, round, SLEEPER/BUST flag). It is unambiguous about what the resource is, but it does not differentiate itself from siblings like best_available or who_do_i_draft, which may overlap in user intent.

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 concrete example queries ('fantasy football rankings 2026', 'who are the top RBs', 'best available by position'), which implies usage context. However, it never explicitly distinguishes this tool from the sibling tools best_available, who_do_i_draft, or sleepers_and_busts, so an agent may struggle to choose among overlapping options.

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

All Fantasy Football Draft Assistant 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

best_available and who_do_i_draft overlap heavily in mid-draft recommendation scenarios, and player_outlook vs explain_player both cover single-player analysis. The other tools are fairly distinct, and the descriptions provide enough usage cues to separate them, but the boundary between the recommendation tools remains blurry.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are lowercase snake_case, but the semantic pattern is mixed: compare_players, draft_board, and explain_player are verb_noun, while adp_market_gaps, best_available, player_outlook, and sleepers_and_busts are noun/adjective phrases, and who_do_i_draft is a question. Still readable and predictable in style, but not consistently verb-first.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools is a well-scoped size for a fantasy draft assistant. Each tool addresses a meaningful draft task—rankings, best available, comparisons, outlooks, and market gaps—without feeling padded or redundant.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the core draft workflow: full board, best remaining players, player comparisons, single-player outlooks, sleepers/busts, and cross-platform ADP gaps. Minor missing pieces like historical ADP trends or league-specific mock drafting exist, but agents can complete typical draft tasks without dead ends.

Resources