Skip to main content
Glama

Serper

by io.github.pipeworx-io

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), 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. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes far beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, etc.) by detailing exactly what data is returned (tracked, expired, snapshot_dates), how trend/decay are computed, limitations (60-day TTL, daily closes), and handling of gaps. 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 fairly long but every sentence adds value. It is front-loaded with the key purpose and then dives into details. Minor verbosity could be trimmed, but it remains 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?

The description fully explains the return shape (tracked[], expired[], snapshot_dates[]) and their fields, along with constraints and data source. Without an output schema, this covers all necessary context for an agent to understand what to expect.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds important context beyond the schema, such as the default values, clamping behavior, and the meaning of 'window' as a snapshot family. This helps the agent understand parameter implications.

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 provides 'Edge persistence and decay telemetry' and answers a specific business question about edge lifespan and decay. It distinguishes itself from related tools like polymarket_edges by focusing on historical tracking rather than just current snapshots.

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 concrete context on when to use the tool (e.g., comparing a fresh edge to an older edge) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternative tools. The context is strong but lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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

All Serper 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The ask_pipeworx family (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research) has blurry boundaries — ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx today — and the six Polymarket tools (polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, polymarket_fill_risk, etc.) all operate in the opportunity-detection space. Extremely detailed descriptions help, but an agent could easily select the wrong variant.

Naming Consistency3/5

Snake_case is used throughout and the polymarket_* and pipeworx_* clusters are internally consistent, but the set mixes verb-first names (ask_pipeworx, resolve_entity, validate_claim) with noun-first names (entity_profile, recent_changes, news, places) roughly evenly. The 'beta' suffix on a stable production tool and the adjective-noun 'deep_research' add further inconsistency.

Tool Count2/5

At 34 tools this exceeds the 25+ threshold, and the count is padded with redundancy: three near-identical ask_pipeworx variants, ai_visibility_check wrapped by scan_competitor_ai_presence, and six overlapping Polymarket tools. The unusually broad multi-domain scope justifies more tools than a typical server, but several clusters could be consolidated.

Completeness4/5

The surface is thorough for a read-only data-access gateway: universal routing, grounded verification, entity resolution/profiles/comparisons, web/news/maps search, prediction-market analysis, memory CRUD, and a full subscription lifecycle. Minor gaps exist (no direct fetch tool for pipeworx:// citation URIs, no image/video Serper endpoints) but agents can work around them.

Resources