Skip to main content
Glama

Alienvault Otx

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Polymarket Edge Tracker

polymarket_edge_tracker
Read-onlyIdempotent

Edge persistence and decay telemetry built from daily polymarket_edges snapshots. Answers "how long has this edge existed and is it shrinking?" — a fresh wide edge and a 3-week-old wide edge are different trades (the latter is wide for a reason nobody is willing to take). Args: days (lookback, default 14, max 30), window (snapshot family, default "1wk"). RESPONSE: tracked[] = every opportunity in the LATEST snapshot with its full edge_pp_net time-series across prior snapshots, first_seen, trend (new | widening | stable | decaying) and decay_pp_per_day (both computed on |edge_pp_net| — the value itself is signed by trade direction, negative = SELL YES); expired[] = opportunities that appeared in earlier snapshots but are GONE from the latest (closed, resolved, or arbed away) with their lifespan_days — the median lifespan is your competition clock; snapshot_dates[] = which days actually have data (snapshots are written when polymarket_edges runs on a cache-miss, so gaps mean nobody scanned that day). LIMITS: history depth is bounded by the 60-day snapshot TTL and starts from when snapshotting was enabled; decay numbers come from daily closes of edge_pp_net (net of default slippage), not intraday.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoLookback in days (default 14, clamp 2-30).
windowNoWhich polymarket_edges window family to read snapshots for: 24hr | 1wk | 1mo (default 1wk).

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant behavioral details beyond annotations: it explains the response structure (tracked, expired, snapshot_dates), field meanings (first_seen, trend, decay_pp_per_day, lifespan_days), and limitations (60-day TTL, snapshot start, daily closes vs intraday). No contradictions with annotations.

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?

The description is informative but somewhat long. It is front-loaded with purpose, then details output fields and limitations. Every sentence adds value, but could be slightly more concise.

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 no output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return format and fields. Parameters are well-described, limitations are stated, and the tool's context relative to snapshots is clear. Complete for understanding usage.

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 parameters are already documented. The description adds usage context: days default and clamp range, window meaning and default. This provides practical guidance beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: edge persistence and decay telemetry from daily snapshots. It answers a specific question about edge age and trend, and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'polymarket_edges' by focusing on historical analysis rather than current snapshots.

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 provides context on when to use the tool (to understand edge history and decay) and contrasts fresh vs old edges. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools for different purposes.

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

All Alienvault Otx 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation1/5

Several tools are nearly indistinguishable, particularly ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded, plus a cluster of overlapping Polymarket tools. The three OTX-specific tools are buried among 31 unrelated utilities, making correct selection highly error-prone.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names are consistently snake_case and mostly readable, but the pattern is mixed: imperative verbs like ask_, get_, lookup_, and validate_ coexist with noun-first names like entity_profile, polymarket_edges, and recent_alerts. It is not chaotic, but the style is not predictable enough for a 5.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is excessive for a server purportedly about Alienvault OTX, with only 3 tools actually serving that domain. The bulk are unrelated data-retrieval, prediction-market, memory, and utility tools, making the set feel unfocused and overstuffed.

Completeness1/5

For a server named Alienvault OTX, the surface is severely incomplete: search_pulses, get_pulse, and lookup_indicator cover only basic threat-intel lookup. There is no coverage of OTX events, malware details, passive DNS, indicator enrichment, or OTX subscription workflows, while most of the 34 tools address entirely different domains.

Resources