Skip to main content
Glama

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

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only annotations, the description discloses snapshot write behavior (cache-miss), 60-day TTL, signed edge_pp_net semantics (negative = SELL YES), decay computed from daily closes not intraday, and the meaning of expired opportunities and gaps in snapshot_dates.

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?

The description is long but well-structured with clear sections: purpose, args, response, limits. Every sentence adds value, front-loaded with the core question, and the labels (RESPONSE, LIMITS) aid scannability.

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?

Without an output schema, the description thoroughly explains the response structure (tracked, expired, snapshot_dates), field semantics, edge cases (cache-miss gaps, TTL bound), and limitations (daily closes, not intraday). Nothing critical is missing for an AI agent to use the tool correctly.

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 already covers both parameters with 100% coverage and defaults. The description restates defaults and adds the phrase 'snapshot family' for window, but no additional syntax or format details beyond the schema are provided, 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 states the tool's purpose: edge persistence and decay telemetry, answering whether an edge is shrinking and for how long it has existed. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on time-series analysis of snapshots rather than current edge values.

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 clear use context via the direct question it answers and the interpretation of fresh versus old edges. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the built-from-polymarket_edges framing implies when to use this instead of the edge computation tool.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools are nearly interchangeable: ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx right now, bet_research overlaps heavily with polymarket_edges and polymarket_arbitrage, and ai_visibility_check vs scan_competitor_ai_presence blur together. Despite detailed descriptions, an agent can easily misselect among these overlapping purpose boundaries.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most names follow a readable verb_noun snake_case pattern (list_countries, search_stations, resolve_entity), but bare verbs like remember/recall/forget and inconsistent prefixes (pipeworx_feedback vs ask_pipeworx, bet_research outside the polymarket_* family) break the pattern. The naming is mixed but still navigable.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is well into the heavy range, and only 4 of them (get_top_stations, list_countries, list_tags, search_stations) pertain to the server's stated 'radio' purpose. The rest form a sprawling research/prediction-market toolkit, making the server feel like multiple unrelated products fused into one.

Completeness3/5

The radio subset covers basic discovery but misses station detail, genre filtering, and stream URLs, an obvious gap for the named domain. The broader Pipeworx/Polymarket suite is expansive with discovery and grounding tools, but remains uneven with no direct per-source browsing and only read-only prediction-market access.