Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Prediction Markets Quant

by com.predictionmarketspicks
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Find Sports Arbitrage Gaps

find_arbitrage
Read-only

Use for "where is the arbitrage" and "Kalshi vs Polymarket price gaps". Cross-venue gaps on the same NFL, NBA, NHL or MLB game: Kalshi against Polymarket US (the exchange US traders use, fees included), Polymarket international as a reference. Gap in pp, WATCH/ARB signal, cheaper venue, settlement_match; near misses when nothing clears. Free: the top 3 gaps in full; Pro returns the whole board.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "find_arbitrage"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
minGapNoMinimum gap in percentage points to include (default 3 = WATCH threshold).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • changedInput schema / properties / minGap / description
      Previous value: -"Minimum gap in percentage points to include (default 3 = WATCH threshold). Accepts a number or a numeric string (\"3\", \"3pp\", \"3%\")."New value: +"Minimum gap in percentage points to include (default 3 = WATCH threshold)."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / minGap / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / minGap / type
      Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "string"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/non-destructive/open-world, and the description layers on real operational detail: Polymarket US is prioritized because it is the venue US traders can use, fees are included, the international book is reference-only, and a near-miss list is returned on empty results. The free/Pro split (top 3 vs whole board) is exactly the kind of tiering an agent needs before promising results.

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?

Front-loaded with the use case and then packed with the venue and output facts, with no filler sentences. It is dense to the point of telegraphic ("Gap in pp", "settlement_match"), which costs a little readability but every clause carries information.

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 exists, so the description must describe return values, and it does: the gap measurement unit, the signal classification, the cheaper venue, settlement_match, and the near-miss fallback. Combined with the tier limits and fee treatment for a one-parameter tool, an agent has enough to call it and set expectations.

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?

There is a single optional parameter with 100% schema description coverage, including the default of 3 and its meaning as the WATCH threshold, so the schema does the work. The prose never references minGap or explains how raising or lowering it interacts with the WATCH/ARB labels, so no value is added beyond the structured field.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: cross-venue price gaps on the same NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB game between Kalshi, Polymarket US and Polymarket international. The output artifacts named (gap in pp, WATCH/ARB signal, cheaper venue, settlement_match) make it unmistakably distinct from calculate_ev or kelly_size.

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?

Gives concrete trigger phrasings ("where is the arbitrage", "Kalshi vs Polymarket price gaps") and bounds the domain to the four major leagues, plus states the near-miss fallback when nothing clears. It never explicitly routes the agent away from a sibling such as calculate_ev, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Prediction Markets Quant toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources