Skip to main content
Glama

Energi Data Dk

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Polymarket Arbitrage

polymarket_arbitrage
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find arbitrage opportunities on Polymarket via monotonicity violations + partition-sum checks. Call with NO args for a trending_scan of the top ~200 markets by weekly volume; pass event for the strongest per-event partition_check, or topic for a themed cross-event scan. event (recommended for a specific market): pass a Polymarket event slug like "fed-decision-may-2026" or "when-will-bitcoin-hit-150k"; walks child markets, checks date-axis / threshold-axis ordering AND computes the partition_check (sum of YES prices across mutually-exclusive legs — should ≈1; deviations >3pp emit a BUY/SELL EVERY LEG signal). topic (for cross-event scanning): pass a seed question like "Strait of Hormuz traffic returns to normal" or "Fed rate decision"; searches related events across the platform, flattens markets, runs the comparator on the union. Cross-event mode catches "...by May 31" vs "...by Jun 30" patterns that single-event misses. SEMANTIC ANCHOR: cross-event pairs require ≥0.30 Jaccard similarity on question tokens (prevents Powell-Fed-Pause being paired with Powell-DOJ-probe); skipped_low_similarity surfaces the rejected pair count. PARTITION FILTER: drops will-person-X / will-manager-Y / will-someone-else- placeholder slugs; partitions with >20% placeholder fraction return null arb signal. Response: opportunities[] (gap_pp, suggested_trade, reasoning, monotonicity violation context), and in event mode partition_check{sum_yes_prices, gap_from_1, placeholders_filtered, suggested_trade}. FILL CHECK: when the partition signal fires, arbitrage.fill_check prices it against live CLOB depth (theoretical_edge_pp_at_book vs realizable_edge_pp at 1000 shares/leg, thin_legs[]) — realizable_edge_pp ≤ 0 means the overround exists only at last-trade, not in the book; do not trade it. For custom sizing use polymarket_fill_risk.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eventNoSingle-event mode (use this if you know the specific Polymarket event): event slug like "fed-decision-may-2026" or "when-will-bitcoin-hit-150k". Full Polymarket URLs also accepted.
topicNoCross-event mode (use this if you want to scan related events across the platform): a topic or seed question like "Fed rate decision" or "Strait of Hormuz traffic returns to normal". Tool searches Polymarket for related events and checks monotonicity across them.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses detailed behavioral traits including monotonicity checks, partition-sum checks, semantic anchor, partition filter, and fill check. Annotations confirm read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, and the description adds significant context beyond 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 somewhat long but well-structured with clear sections and key terms. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the main purpose. Could be slightly more concise but still effective.

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?

The description covers the main response fields and processes for all three modes. It lacks some details on error handling and limits, but given the complexity and no output schema, it provides adequate context for proper tool usage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds substantial meaning beyond the input schema's parameter descriptions, providing examples, explaining mode behavior, and detailing what each parameter triggers. Schema coverage is 100% but description enriches greatly.

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 finds arbitrage opportunities on Polymarket using specific methods (monotonicity violations and partition-sum checks). It is distinct from sibling tools like polymarket_edges and polymarket_fill_risk.

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?

The description explicitly explains three usage modes (no args, event, topic) with recommendations and when to use each. It also references sibling tool polymarket_fill_risk for custom sizing, providing clear usage guidance.

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

All Energi Data Dk 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
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools form overlapping clusters that are hard for an agent to distinguish: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, validate_claim, discover_tools, and suggest_questions all cover factual/research lookups, and the five Polymarket tools also overlap heavily. ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx right now, making misselection essentially guaranteed in that pair. The descriptions are detailed, but the boundaries between many tools remain unclear at the set level.

Naming Consistency4/5

Almost all tool names are snake_case and mostly follow readable verb_noun or domain-specific patterns, such as ask_pipeworx*, resolve_entity, validate_claim, and polymarket_*. Minor deviations exist — bare verbs like remember/recall/forget/subscribe and noun-style names like spot_prices/co2_intensity — but there is no mixed casing and the overall pattern is predictable.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is already over the 25+ threshold for a well-scoped server, and the mismatch is much worse because only three tools (co2_intensity, spot_prices, query_dataset) relate to the advertised Energi Data DK domain. The other 31 tools appear to belong to an unrelated general-purpose Pipeworx platform, so the count is not appropriate for the server's stated purpose.

Completeness3/5

For the stated Energi Data DK domain, energy data access is partially covered: two dedicated tools plus query_dataset as a generic escape hatch for all ~100 datasets prevents hard dead ends, but there are no typed tools for most of those datasets and no energy-specific monitoring/alerting. If the real intended domain is the broader Pipeworx platform, coverage is much stronger, but then the server name is misleading.

Resources