Skip to main content
Glama

Cloudflare Radar

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Polymarket Edge Tracker

polymarket_edge_tracker
Read-onlyIdempotent

Edge persistence and decay telemetry built from daily polymarket_edges snapshots. Answers "how long has this edge existed and is it shrinking?" — a fresh wide edge and a 3-week-old wide edge are different trades (the latter is wide for a reason nobody is willing to take). Args: days (lookback, default 14, max 30), window (snapshot family, default "1wk"). RESPONSE: tracked[] = every opportunity in the LATEST snapshot with its full edge_pp_net time-series across prior snapshots, first_seen, trend (new | widening | stable | decaying) and decay_pp_per_day (both computed on |edge_pp_net| — the value itself is signed by trade direction, negative = SELL YES); expired[] = opportunities that appeared in earlier snapshots but are GONE from the latest (closed, resolved, or arbed away) with their lifespan_days — the median lifespan is your competition clock; snapshot_dates[] = which days actually have data (snapshots are written when polymarket_edges runs on a cache-miss, so gaps mean nobody scanned that day). LIMITS: history depth is bounded by the 60-day snapshot TTL and starts from when snapshotting was enabled; decay numbers come from daily closes of edge_pp_net (net of default slippage AND Polymarket's own taker fee — see polymarket_edges), not intraday.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoLookback in days (default 14, clamp 2-30).
windowNoWhich polymarket_edges window family to read snapshots for: 24hr | 1wk | 1mo (default 1wk).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "days": 14,
+    "window": "1wk"
+  }
+]
  2. Added
  3. Removed
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, and the description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond that: snapshot gap semantics, TTL limits, fee-inclusive decay computation, the signed nature of edge_pp_net, expired[] lifecycle meaning, and the fact that decay uses daily closes rather than intraday data. No contradictions with 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 long but densely organized into Args, RESPONSE, and LIMITS sections, with the core purpose front-loaded. Some rhetorical flourishes ('the median lifespan is your competition clock') add color but not operational necessity. It earns a high score for structure, though it sacrifices some conciseness.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully carries the burden of explaining return values and edge cases. It explains tracked[], expired[], snapshot_dates[], data gaps, history depth limits, and fee/slippage treatment. An agent has everything needed to call this correctly and interpret the response.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both days and window fully. The description restates defaults and adds a 'max 30' note for days and the snapshot-family concept for window, but it does not introduce meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. 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 states a specific purpose: edge persistence and decay telemetry from daily polymarket_edges snapshots, and answers a concrete question ('how long has this edge existed and is it shrinking?'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like polymarket_edges by focusing on historical persistence/decay rather than current edge values.

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 clearly establishes when to use the tool: when an agent needs edge longevity, trend, and decay rather than just current edge values. It even explains why this matters ('a fresh wide edge and a 3-week-old wide edge are different trades'). However, it never explicitly names alternatives or states when not to use it, so it falls just short of full explicit routing guidance.

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

All Cloudflare Radar 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