CoinRithm Agent Trading

Open prediction-market position

open_pm_position

Idempotent

Open a mock prediction-market position (binary outcomes only). Requires the trade:pm scope. Enabled now (server-flag gated — returns 403 'not enabled' only if CoinRithm later disables it). idempotencyKey is REQUIRED. stakeMusd >= 10. Pass side: 'no' to back the NO side (omitted = yes); a NO entry fills at 100 minus the outcome probability and pays out if the outcome resolves false. Quote first and CONFIRM with the user. Paper trading only — virtual funds (50,000 mUSD). Not financial advice. Paper fills run under the versioned paper_execution_v1 policy and apply a disclosed execution cost folded into realized PnL: spot/futures pay a taker fee (spot market orders also pay half-spread + slippage); PM fills at the ask with size-based slippage and a Polymarket-shaped taker fee, with entryProbability kept at the mid for calibration. See the executionModel in quote/trade results — a rehearsal cost, not an exchange fill guarantee.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`side`	No	Which side of the binary outcome to back. NO pays out if it resolves false; fills at 100 minus the outcome probability. Omitted = yes.
`slug`	Yes	Prediction-market event slug.
`source`	Yes	Prediction-market source slug, e.g. kalshi or polymarket.
`stakeMusd`	Yes	mUSD stake (>= 10).
`agentTrace`	No	Optional private trace metadata stored in the caller's ledger.
`provenance`	No	Optional self-reported provenance (WHAT RAN). No trust: the server stamps policy versions + providerVerified itself. Any block (even {}) makes the artifact schemaVersion 2.
`idempotencyKey`	Yes	Unique per PM-open intent; reuse replays the original result.
`forecastProbability`	No	OPTIONAL. Report your OWN estimated probability (0-100, exclusive) that the chosen side wins, decided BEFORE you look at sizing/fill. It is stored SEPARATELY from the market price you pay and feeds your PUBLIC calibration record (agentBrier), which scores your forecast SKILL — not the market's. Omit it if you are not forecasting; never echo the market probability back.
`outcomeExternalMarketId`	Yes	Case-sensitive outcome or market id returned by discovery.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	True when CoinRithm returned a successful 2xx response.
`body`	No	Parsed CoinRithm response body, or raw text when the response is not JSON.
`httpStatus`	Yes	HTTP status returned by CoinRithm, or 0 for network errors.
`ledgerStatus`	No	Ledger write status header returned by CoinRithm, when present.
`ledgerEventId`	No	Private AgentActionEvent id returned by /api/agent/*, when present.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Description goes beyond annotations by detailing server-flag gating (403 if disabled), paper trading nature, execution costs (taker fees, slippage), and the use of idempotencyKey for replay. This provides rich behavioral context beyond the basic annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false).

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?

The description is reasonably concise given the complexity, with critical information front-loaded (binary outcomes, scope, idempotency, min stake). Each sentence adds value, though it could be slightly tightened without losing clarity.

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 the tool's complexity (9 parameters, 5 required, nested objects), the description covers gating, scoping, constraints, paper trading specifics, cost details, and idempotency behavior. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description is complete and thoroughly sets 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with comprehensive parameter descriptions. The description adds overall context (e.g., side behavior, idempotencyKey requirement) but does not significantly enhance individual parameter meanings beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Open a mock prediction-market position (binary outcomes only)', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pm_quote (quoting) and spot/futures orders by focusing on binary PM positions.

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?

The description provides explicit usage guidance: requires trade:pm scope, idempotencyKey required, stake>=10, side defaults to yes, and instructs to quote first and confirm with the user. It also notes paper trading only. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use or list alternative tools for other order types like spot or futures.

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

All CoinRithm Agent Trading 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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource or action (e.g., spot vs futures vs PM, quote vs open vs close, different PM data endpoints). Descriptions provide clear context and usage guidance, eliminating ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., `cancel_spot_order`, `open_futures_position`, `pm_data_event`). Even `whoami` is a common exception. Naming is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count4/5

35 tools is on the high side but appropriate for a multi-venue trading platform covering spot, futures, prediction markets, analytics, and account management. Each tool serves a distinct purpose, though minor consolidation could be possible.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full trading lifecycle: quotes, order placement, cancellation, position management, SL/TP, portfolio tracking, performance, and extensive market data. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.

Open prediction-market position

Input Schema

Output Schema

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources