Skip to main content
Glama

Revternal

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. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint etc. Description adds rich context: response structure, trend calculation (new/widening/stable/decaying), meaning of negative edge_pp_net (SELL YES), and that gaps mean no scan that day. 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?

Purpose is front-loaded. Structure is clear: purpose, args, response fields, limits. Slightly verbose but well-organized. Every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema, so description must explain return values. It thoroughly details tracked[] (time-series, first_seen, trend, decay), expired[] (lifespan_days), and snapshot_dates[]. Also covers limitations and computation details. Very complete.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description confirms defaults (days=14, window='1wk') and clamp (2-30) but does not add new semantic guidance beyond the schema. Adequate but not superior.

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 answers 'how long has this edge existed and is it shrinking?' and details the output structure (tracked[], expired[], snapshot_dates[]). It differentiates from sibling 'polymarket_edges' by focusing on persistence and decay over time.

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?

Explicitly guides when to use: to understand edge longevity vs. current edges. Mentions limits (60-day TTL, snapshotting start) and that decay numbers are from daily closes, not intraday. Implicitly contrasts with alternatives.

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

All Revternal 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several tool families (ask_pipeworx variants, polymarket analysis tools) have overlapping purposes, which could confuse an agent. However, descriptions are detailed and help differentiate them in most cases.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names use snake_case and are descriptive, but prefixes vary (ask_, polymarket_, revternal_, etc.) and some verbs are standalone (forget, recall, remember), breaking a strict verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count3/5

35 tools is on the high side, but the scope is broad (data research, prediction markets, developer intel). Some redundancy (multiple ask_pipeworx modes) could be consolidated, making the set feel slightly heavy.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers core CRUD for data, memory, subscriptions, and analytics. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no file upload, limited account management), but the domain is well-served.

Resources