Get what the prediction markets are betting on right now. Fetches top markets by volume/liquidity.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Number of results (default 10, max 50) | |
| source | No | polymarket, manifold, or all (default: all) | all |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided. Description lacks disclosure of side effects, permissions, rate limits, or data freshness. 'Fetches' implies read-only but not explicit. Needs more behavioral context.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences: first states main purpose, second adds detail. No fluff, front-loaded. Every sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Simple tool without output schema. Description explains what is fetched and why. Lacks explicit mention of return format but sufficient for typical usage. Well-contextualized among siblings.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema has 100% coverage on both parameters (limit, source). Description adds minor context ('top markets by volume/liquidity') but doesn't significantly enhance meaning beyond schema. Baseline 3.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states verb 'get' and resource 'prediction markets', specifying 'top markets by volume/liquidity'. Distinguishes from siblings: browse_prediction_markets (general) and get_market_details (specific).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Implicitly suggests use for current trending markets ('right now', 'top by volume/liquidity'), but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives compared to siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: browsing markets with filters, getting detailed information on a specific market, and fetching trending markets. There is no functional overlap.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: browse_prediction_markets, get_market_details, get_trending_predictions.
Three tools is appropriate for a focused server covering browsing, details, and trending. The scope is well-defined without being too sparse or bloated.
The set covers the core information retrieval needs: discover, examine, and see trends. A minor gap is historical data or outcome timelines, but for a lightweight server this is reasonable.