Prediction-market implied probabilities from Polymarket: search live event markets and get outcome probabilities, volume, and end date. Send { query, limit? }. Crowd-sourced odds for any event as a data feed. [x402 paid tool — price $0.005; POST /api/predict/odds]
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max markets, default 10 | |
| query | No | Search terms, e.g. 'bitcoin 100k' |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses the tool is paid ($0.005, x402), uses POST, and retrieves data.read-only behavior is implied but not explicit. No mention of rate limits, authentication details, or side effects.
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?
Three concise sentences: purpose, parameter format, and pricing notes. No filler. Information is front-loaded and efficient.
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?
With no output schema, the description lists what you get (probabilities, volume, end date) but lacks specifics like format (e.g., probabilities as decimals/percentages). Adequate for a search tool but slightly incomplete.
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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The description reiterates 'Send { query, limit? }' without adding meaning beyond the schema (e.g., examples, formats, or constraints). Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
The description clearly states 'search live event markets and get outcome probabilities, volume, and end date' from Polymarket, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling predict tools by focusing on searching and retrieving probabilities.
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?
The description implies usage for searching Polymarket odds via keywords ('search live event markets') but does not explicitly contrast with siblings like predict_market (by ID) or predict_trending. No when-not guidance, but context is clear.
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.
Tools are organized by domain prefix (e.g., 'crypto_', 'rh_', 'snipe_'), which helps distinguish between areas. Within each domain, they serve distinct purposes, though some overlap between domains exists (e.g., price data appears in multiple groups). Overall, an agent can navigate effectively.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern with a domain prefix and a verb_noun combination (e.g., 'compliance_risk', 'rh_stock', 'snipe_honeypot'). This makes the API predictable and easy to explore.
With 159 tools, the server is extremely large. While the broad scope of web3 and utility functions justifies many tools, the count is significantly above the typical range for a coherent toolkit, potentially overwhelming agents and increasing selection error.
The toolkit covers a wide range of web3 operations: crypto, DeFi, compliance, safety, scheduling, memory, etc. There are no obvious major gaps for its intended purpose, though some niche areas might be missing.