Skip to main content
Glama

Espn

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Recent Changes

recent_changes
Read-onlyIdempotent

"What's new with X" / "latest on Y" / "what happened to Z this week / month / quarter" / "updates on Acme" / "news on Tesla recently" / "what's happening with Apple" — change feed for a company in the last N days/weeks/months in ONE parallel call. Fans out to SEC EDGAR (filings since since), GDELT→GNews fallback (news mentions in window — GDELT preferred, GNews when rate-limited or 5xx), USPTO (patents granted; PatentsView API sunset May 2025 so this soft-fails until reactivated). since accepts ISO date ("2026-04-01") or relative shorthand ("7d", "30d", "3m", "1y"). Returns structured changes[] grouped by source + total_changes count + pipeworx:// citation URIs. Use entity_profile instead when you want the static profile (filings + fundamentals + LEI + patents) regardless of window.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesEntity type. Only "company" supported today.
sinceYesWindow start — ISO date ("2026-04-01") or relative ("7d", "30d", "3m", "1y"). Use "30d" or "1m" for typical monitoring.
valueYesTicker (e.g., "AAPL") or zero-padded CIK (e.g., "0000320193").

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds details about parallel fan-out, source fallback (GDELT→GNews), USPTO soft-failure, and return structure.

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?

Front-loaded with examples but slightly verbose (e.g., PatentsView sunset detail). Every sentence adds value, though could be tightened.

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?

Given 3 sources, fallback, multiple parameter formats, and no output schema, description covers return structure, soft-failures, and alternative usage thoroughly.

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%, description reinforces but adds only minor practical examples (e.g., recommended 'since' values). No new parameter semantics beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'change feed' and resource 'company recent changes', with example queries. Explicitly distinguishes from sibling entity_profile.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit when-to-use examples and directs to entity_profile for static profile needs. Explains fallback behavior and soft-failures.

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

All Espn 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

Several tools cluster around similar purposes—the three ask_pipeworx variants, the five polymarket_* analysis tools, and the meta/discovery tools (discover_tools, suggest_questions, pipeworx_trending)—so an agent could plausibly call the wrong one. However, the descriptions are exceptionally detailed with explicit 'use this when' guidance, which mitigates most confusion.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are almost all snake_case, but there is no consistent verb_noun or resource_action pattern: ask_pipeworx, entity_profile, remember, get_scoreboard, polymarket_fill_risk, etc. Pairs like remember/recall/forget and subscribe/unsubscribe are consistent, but the broader set mixes verbs, nouns, and prefixes (ask_, pipeworx_, polymarket_, get_, scan_) without a unified scheme.

Tool Count2/5

36 tools is well over the 25-tool 'heavy' threshold, and the set spans multiple unrelated domains: sports data, a general structured-data router, prediction-market analysis, memory storage, and user feedback. Many tools are meta or auxiliary (suggest_questions, pipeworx_feedback, remember/recall/forget) that don't clearly belong to the server's core purpose, making the set feel bloated.

Completeness3/5

For a sports-data server, core score/news/standings/team/schedule operations exist, but player stats, game details, injuries, and playoff brackets are missing. For the broader Pipeworx data platform the surface is extensive, but the mix of domains makes it hard to declare the set complete for any single stated purpose.

Resources