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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description details the response structure (tracked, expired, snapshot_dates) and explains each field's meaning, including edge sign conventions and decay computation. It also discloses limits (60-day TTL, cache-miss snapshots). Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior, and the description adds no contradiction.

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 thorough yet concise, front-loading the core purpose and then efficiently detailing the response structure and limits. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy.

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 the absence of an output schema, the description fully explains the return values (tracked, expired, snapshot_dates) and their subfields. It covers edge cases (e.g., negative edge values) and temporal constraints (60-day TTL). The tool is complex but the description provides complete context.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds context beyond the schema by explaining default values, clamping behavior, and the meaning of window families. However, much of the parameter info is already in the schema, so the added value is moderate.

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 provides 'edge persistence and decay telemetry' from daily snapshots, answering a specific question about edge longevity. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like polymarket_edges by focusing on time-series analysis and decay trends.

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 implicitly guides usage by explaining what the tool answers ('how long has this edge existed and is it shrinking?'), but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like polymarket_edges. It provides clear context but lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, especially in networking and domain-specific queries. However, the multiple `ask_pipeworx` variants (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) and `deep_research` have overlapping functionality, which could cause occasional misselection.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names use inconsistent conventions: some are concatenated (geoloc, whois), some use underscores (abuse_contact, as_overview), and some are multi-word (scan_competitor_ai_presence, ask_pipeworx_grounded). No consistent pattern across the set.

Tool Count3/5

39 tools is high for a single server, but justified by the broad scope covering networking, finance, prediction markets, AI visibility, and more. However, many tools are meta-tools for the Pipeworx ecosystem, making the set feel slightly bloated.

Completeness5/5

The server covers an exceptionally wide range of domains comprehensively, with tools for networking, company data, FDA datasets, prediction markets, weather, news, and more. It includes memory and subscription management, leaving few obvious gaps for its stated data-retrieval purpose.