Skip to main content
Glama

Datos Co

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

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it details the response structure (tracked, expired, snapshot_dates), explains limits (60-day TTL, cache-miss dependency), and clarifies decay computation. No contradiction 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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, parameter listing, response format, and limits. It is thorough but slightly verbose; could be more concise while retaining essential details.

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?

The description fully covers the tool's behavior, response output, and constraints for a read-only tool with two simple parameters and no output schema. No gaps are identified.

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% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning (e.g., 'snapshot family') but mostly reiterates schema info, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 defines the tool as edge persistence and decay telemetry, answering specific questions about edge duration and shrinkage. It distinguishes from the sibling `polymarket_edges` by focusing on historical tracking 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 (for understanding edge persistence and decay) and implicitly contrasts with tools that show current edges. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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

All Datos Co 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

Most tools have distinct purposes, but several natural-language query tools (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, validate_claim) occupy overlapping territory, and ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx right now. The prediction-market cluster (polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, bet_research, polymarket_fill_risk, polymarket_edge_tracker, polymarket_kalshi_spread) also has fuzzy boundaries, though the long descriptions help an agent differentiate.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are consistently lowercase with underscores, and there are coherent subfamilies like ask_pipeworx*, polymarket_*, and scan_*. However, the overall set mixes conventions: verb_noun (query_dataset, resolve_entity), noun_noun (entity_profile, bet_research), adjective_noun (recent_changes), and bare verbs (remember, recall, forget), so no single predictable pattern governs the server.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is a heavy surface for one server, including multiple meta/onboarding utilities (discover_tools, suggest_questions, pipeworx_feedback, pipeworx_trending) and a large prediction-market subcluster. The count exceeds the 25-tool threshold where a tool set typically becomes unwieldy, and several tools could be consolidated or split into separate servers.

Completeness4/5

For a read-heavy data research platform, the surface is very complete: discovery, routed lookup, grounded verification, entity resolution, profiles, comparisons, change feeds, dataset querying, prediction-market research, and full memory/subscription lifecycles are all covered. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit pipeworx:// URI read tool and no subscription update operation, but agents can work around them.

Resources