404.directory

Preflight a Polymarket decision

evaluate_prediction_market

Evaluate one specific Polymarket market before an AI Agent observes or contemplates buying or selling a Yes/No position. Use immediately before a decision when settlement wording, source ambiguity, timing boundaries, order-book depth, spread, slippage, geographic eligibility, or unattended execution could change whether the Agent should proceed. Returns a deterministic allow, review, or block decision with public evidence, a risk score, bounded unknowns, and a receipt. This tool never predicts the winner, never places or signs an order, never accesses a wallet, and is not investment or legal advice. For size-specific liquidity analysis, provide estimated_notional_usd. For a trading action, provide the current geoblock result from the real execution environment rather than guessing eligibility.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "market": "<market>",
      "intended_action": "<intended_action>"
    },
    "name": "evaluate_prediction_market"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`market`	Yes	A Polymarket market URL, numeric market ID, or exact market slug. Other hosts are rejected.
`execution_mode`	No	Whether a human will supervise the contemplated action.	supervised
`intended_action`	Yes	The next action under consideration. Use observe for research that will not place an order.
`estimated_notional_usd`	No	Approximate USD notional of the contemplated order. Include it for depth and slippage analysis; this never places an order.
`geographic_eligibility`	No	Caller-observed result of Polymarket's geoblock check from the actual execution environment. It is self-reported and not independently verified by 404.directory.	unknown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedAug 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

While annotations indicate openWorldHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, the description adds valuable specifics: 'never predicts the winner, never places or signs an order, never accesses a wallet' and that it returns a deterministic decision with evidence and risk score. This goes beyond annotations and clarifies the non-transactional nature without contradicting them.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with purpose and usage, followed by return characteristics and parameter tips. Each sentence adds value, though it is slightly long. It avoids redundancy and is appropriately organized for an agent.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given there is no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (a deterministic allow/review/block decision, public evidence, risk score, bounded unknowns, receipt). It also clarifies exclusions (not advice, no trades). It covers all parameters contextually and is complete for the tool's preflight purpose.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and each parameter already has a description. The tool description adds usage guidance for estimated_notional_usd ('for size-specific liquidity analysis') and for geographic_eligibility ('provide the current geoblock result from the real execution environment'), which enriches parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 verb (evaluate), the specific resource (one Polymarket market), and the context (before an AI Agent observes or contemplates buying/selling a Yes/No position). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like report_prediction_market_outcome (post-decision) by emphasizing the pre-decision 'preflight' nature.

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 says 'Use immediately before a decision' and lists specific conditions that trigger use (settlement wording, source ambiguity, timing, depth, etc.). It also gives parameter-specific guidance for liquidity and geoblock. However, it does not name alternative tools or explicitly state when NOT to use this tool, though the context strongly implies pre-trade evaluation.

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

All 404.directory tools Inspect

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.