Manifold

Get Bets

get-bets

Get bets from markets or for users with various filtering options

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	Optional. Bet ID to filter by
`after`	No	Optional. Get bets after this bet ID
`kinds`	No	Optional. Filter by bet kind
`limit`	No	Optional. Number of bets to return (default: 1000)
`order`	No	Optional. Sort order by creation time
`before`	No	Optional. Get bets before this bet ID
`userId`	No	Optional. User ID to filter by
`answerId`	No	Optional. Answer ID to filter by
`username`	No	Optional. Username to filter by
`afterTime`	No	Optional. Get bets after this timestamp
`minAmount`	No	Optional. Minimum bet amount
`beforeTime`	No	Optional. Get bets before this timestamp
`contractId`	No	Optional. Contract ID(s) to filter by
`contractSlug`	No	Optional. Contract slug to filter by
`filterRedemptions`	No	Optional. Filter redemptions

Schema Changelog

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

First observedJan 31, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only says 'Get bets', implying read-only but omits any details about pagination, rate limits, defaults, or possible side effects. The schema lists a default limit but the description does not mention it.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the verb 'Get' and avoids redundancy. Every word contributes to the overall purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 15 optional parameters and no output schema, a one-sentence description is inadequate. It does not mention return values, pagination, or high-level usage scenarios. The schema descriptions cover parameter details but not the broader context needed to invoke the tool effectively.

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?

The schema provides descriptions for all 15 parameters, so the description's generic 'various filtering options' adds no additional meaning. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the tool as retrieving bets, with sources ('markets' or 'users') and mentions filtering. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-market/get-user (single resources) and search-markets/search-users (search operations).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'from markets or for users' hints at contexts, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It does not state when to prefer this tool over search-markets or get-market, though the resource difference is implicit.

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

All Manifold tools Inspect

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

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: get-bets is for bets, get-market for a single market, get-user for a single user, while search-markets and search-users are search counterparts. There is no overlap or confusion between fetching a single entity and searching for multiple.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb-noun pattern with lowercase and hyphenation: get-bets, get-market, get-user, search-markets, search-users. The verbs 'get' and 'search' are clear and consistently applied.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for a read-only prediction market API. Each tool covers a core resource (markets, users, bets) without unnecessary bloat or missing essential access points.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface fully covers the read-only domain: search and retrieve markets, search and retrieve users, and fetch bets by market or user. There are no obvious gaps for the stated purpose of accessing prediction market data.

Resources

Need Help?