Skip to main content
Glama

CoinRithm Agent Trading

by io.github.CoinRithm

Global prediction-market volume trend

pm_data_volume_history
Read-only

Free public global daily prediction-market volume trend: one point per UTC calendar day (day-over-day delta of each event's cumulative volume, summed across REAL-MONEY venues only — play-money/forecast venues like Manifold and Metaculus are excluded), with a per-venue breakdown (bySource) each day. Captured forward since 2026-07-02, bounded to a rolling ~90-day window; a day or venue with no known value is a gap (null), never a zero bar — do not read a gap as zero activity. Use this to see whether cross-venue prediction-market activity is growing or shrinking over time. No API key required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesTrue when CoinRithm returned a successful 2xx response.
bodyNoParsed CoinRithm response body, or raw text when the response is not JSON.
httpStatusYesHTTP status returned by CoinRithm, or 0 for network errors.
ledgerStatusNoLedger write status header returned by CoinRithm, when present.
ledgerEventIdNoPrivate AgentActionEvent id returned by /api/agent/*, when present.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: no API key required, data captured since a specific date, rolling 90-day window, and crucial detail that gaps are null not zero. This goes beyond annotations.

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 moderately long but well-structured with key details front-loaded. It could be slightly more concise (e.g., 'bounded to a rolling ~90-day window' is clear but verbose), but overall it is efficient and informative.

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 zero parameters, readOnly and destructive hints, and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains venue inclusion/exclusion, date range, gap handling, and purpose. No additional context is needed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are no parameters (0 params, 100% schema coverage). The description does not need to add parameter information. It is well-complemented by the schema, earning a baseline of 4.

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 returns a global daily prediction-market volume trend, specifying one point per UTC day, and distinguishes between real-money and play-money venues. This provides a specific verb+resource with clear scope.

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 explicitly states the use case: 'see whether cross-venue prediction-market activity is growing or shrinking over time.' It also explains what is excluded (play-money venues) and how gaps are handled. However, it does not directly contrast with siblings or state when not to use this tool.

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 toolsInspect
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.

Resources