voxodds

get_edge_signals

Get VoxOdds' ranked market signals: unusually wide spreads, closing-soon watches, and integrity flags across live prediction markets — where the numbers say to LOOK first. Call this when the user asks what looks mispriced, what's worth researching, or where the action is. Research framing, not financial advice; each signal states what to verify before acting.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only, non-destructive operation (research framing). Could be more explicit about side effects or authentication, but the description suffices for safe usage.

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?

Single paragraph, front-loaded with core purpose, then usage guidance and caveat. Slightly verbose with 'where the numbers say to LOOK first' but overall efficient and well-structured.

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 low complexity (1 param, output schema exists), the description covers the tool's purpose, usage context, and output nature (research framing). No additional details needed.

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?

Only one parameter (limit) with no description in the text. Schema coverage is 0%, but the parameter is self-explanatory and has a default. The description adds no meaning beyond schema, but the parameter is simple.

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 retrieves VoxOdds' ranked market signals, listing specific types (unusually wide spreads, closing-soon watches, integrity flags) and their purpose (where to look first). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_market_odds or list_trending_markets.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit guidance provided: 'Call this when the user asks what looks mispriced, what's worth researching, or where the action is.' Also includes a caveat about research framing versus financial advice, setting proper expectations.

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

All voxodds 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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct purposes, but a few overlap: get_market_odds and get_world_cup_odds both handle World Cup probability questions, and get_edge_signals and get_research_theses both point to potentially mispriced markets. The descriptions help clarify intent, but the boundaries are not always crisp.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case, with verbs like get, list, submit, check, compare, find. Even compound objects like best_price or world_cup_odds fit the pattern cleanly, and no mixed conventions or camelCase appear.

Tool Count5/5

At 14 tools, the server is well-scoped within the 3-15 typical range. Each tool serves a distinct function—odds lookup, market browsing, research, forecasting, and World Cup-specific content—without redundant bloat. The count feels appropriate for the broad domain.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers a complete workflow: discovering markets, comparing odds, evaluating bets, finding best prices, getting quotes, submitting forecasts, and reviewing personal and AI track records. The lack of an execution tool is intentional (the server is research-oriented), and the append-only forecast model makes missing update/delete operations a non-issue.

Resources

Need Help?