Skip to main content
Glama

Sorqen

by io.github.iFan6oy

Grade a pregame price against the Sorqen record

grade

Grade a pregame price or probability against Sorqen's fair value at that timestamp, Sorqen Close when available, and the settled result when available. Requires a Sorqen key. Sorqen uses only information that existed at or before observed_at, so the answer carries no look-ahead. Before kickoff the close and result come back as pending and their metrics are null, never zero. venue is a label for your own records; Sorqen never fetches it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
priceYesThe format is declared, never inferred: 1.91 is decimal odds to one caller and nonsense to another.
venueNoOptional label for where your price came from. Metadata only.
outcome_idYes
observed_atYesISO 8601 timestamp of when you saw the price. Must be before the scheduled start.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the no-look-ahead property, the pending close/result behavior with 'null, never zero', and that venue is never fetched. It does not describe the exact return shape, but the material behavioral context is well covered.

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?

Four sentences, each contributing a distinct piece of information: purpose, auth requirement, look-ahead property, pending semantics, and venue behavior. No filler or repetition.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers core behavior, auth, pending-state semantics, and the role of venue, while the input schema handles parameter details. The only notable gap is that the returned grade metrics are mentioned but not enumerated.

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?

The schema already documents price, observed_at, and venue with 75% coverage, including the important 'format is declared, never inferred' detail. The description adds only that venue is a label Sorqen never fetches, which is useful but marginal. outcome_id remains undocumented in both schema and description, but the high schema coverage keeps this at baseline.

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 object: 'Grade a pregame price or probability' against Sorqen's fair value, close, and settled result. This clearly distinguishes the tool from fetch-oriented siblings like get_fair_value and get_fair_value_history.

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 context: use this when you have an observed pregame price and want to grade it against Sorqen's record. It also states a prerequisite ('Requires a Sorqen key') and the schema adds the 'Must be before the scheduled start' constraint. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Sorqen 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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: describe_* covers meta topics, list_* covers discovery, get_* covers retrieval, and grade is a unique action. The descriptions explicitly cross-reference when to use one tool vs another, such as list_fair_values for discovery and get_fair_value for known outcome ids.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names are overwhelmingly consistent snake_case imperative verb_noun pairs (describe_, get_, list_), and grade is a readable verb-only command. The single deviation from verb_noun is minor and does not create confusion.

Tool Count5/5

Ten tools is well-scoped for the server's purpose: meta/explanation tools, discovery tools, retrieval tools, and a grading action. Each tool earns its place without overlapping or feeling like filler.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full read-only workflow: discover supported leagues, list and fetch fair values, retrieve history, grade submitted prices, and understand settlement rules, plans, and authentication. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated domain.

Resources