Skip to main content
Glama

Bet Research

bet_research
Read-onlyIdempotent

Research a Polymarket bet by pulling the relevant Pipeworx data for it in one call. Pass a market slug ("when-will-bitcoin-hit-150k"), a polymarket.com URL, or a question text. Prefer an UNDATED slug: a dated one ("...-by-june-30-2026") stops resolving the day it settles, because Polymarket de-indexes resolved markets. The tool resolves the market, classifies the bet, fans out to category-specific data packs in parallel, and returns an evidence packet + simple market-vs-model comparison. Use for "should I bet on X", "what does the data say about Y", or "is there edge in Z". CLASSIFIERS: crypto_price, fed_rate, geopolitical, sports, sports_championship, drug_approval, election_candidate, tech_launch, space_launch, corporate, corporate_earnings, corporate_event, public_figure_speech, weather, other. FAN-OUT EXAMPLES: BTC bet → coingecko + fred + gdelt+gnews; Fed bet → fred (DFEDTARU + EFFR + CPIAUCSL) + kalshi_macro (KXFED implied probs) + recent_fed_actions (federal-register rules, last 365d); Hormuz bet → imf_portwatch + airspace + gdelt; Yankees WS → mlb_stats_standings + parent_event partition + news; hottest-year bet → climate_projection_nyc + gistemp_latest (NASA global anomaly, rank since 1880) + news; NVDA-vs-AAPL → finnhub get_quote + edgar shares-outstanding (derived market cap) + edgar filings + news. RESPONSE SHAPES: result.market carries best_bid/best_ask/spread_pp/liquidity/price_change_1h/1d/1w; result.analysis carries model_probability/edge_pp/kelly_fraction_half when a closed-form model fires PLUS a 24h-move warning ("Market moved X.Xpp in 24h, comparable to model edge — your edge may already be priced in") when relevant; result.evidence is keyed by source. RESOLVER CONTRACT: result.market_match_confidence ∈ {high, medium, low, none}, market_match_score (0-1 token-overlap), market_match_alternatives[] (other candidate markets the resolver considered), and suggestions[] (explicit re-query hints when the match is fuzzy) — ALWAYS inspect these before trusting the analysis block, because medium/low matches can still surface other fields. PARENT_EVENT EXTRACTOR: when the bet is one leg of a partition (Yankees WS, Romania election), result.parent_event{matched_candidate, top_legs_by_price[], partition_size, placeholders_filtered} gives you the peer prices in one place — that's the headline for elections/championships. NEWS FIELDS: news entries carry _fallback_attempted / _fallback_failed_reason / retry_after_sec when GDELT 429s and GNews backfill ran or failed. SAFETY: low-confidence resolutions short-circuit with status:"low_confidence_match" and suppress analysis fields so agents can't accidentally size on phantom matches. Closed/dead markets that ARE still indexed by Polymarket (yes_price≈0, no volume, no liquidity) return status:"market_closed_or_inactive" and skip fan-out. A market whose own deadline has already passed returns status:"market_expired_or_resolved" + expired_deadline (the date), which is deliberately NOT the same answer as low_confidence_match: your slug was right and is merely settled, so the useful retry is the successor market for the same question, not a corrected spelling. In practice resolved markets are usually de-indexed and instead surface via one of those two paths — both routes are BLOCKING, just different mechanisms. Wide-spread markets (>10pp) carry tradeability:"illiquid_wide_spread" + an explanatory note. RESOLUTION-RULE RISK: market.cancellation_rule parses the void/postponement settlement out of the resolution text — refund_50_50 (shares settle flat 50¢ on void; EV-material for any entry away from 50¢, with ev_impact quantified), resolves_no_on_cancel, resolves_yes_on_cancel, carries_to_reschedule, or mentioned_unclear. null means the description never mentions cancellation. Check this before sizing sports/esports/event-occurrence bets — audited arb-bot ledgers show flat-50¢ void settlements are a recurring pure-rules loss.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
depthNoquick = 2-3 evidence sources, thorough = full fan-out. Default thorough.
marketYesPolymarket slug ("when-will-bitcoin-hit-150k"), full URL ("https://polymarket.com/event/..."), or question text ("Will Bitcoin hit $150k?"). Dated slugs stop resolving once they settle — Polymarket de-indexes resolved markets — so prefer an undated one.
include_rawNoDefault false. When false (recommended), FRED/FDA/GDELT/Federal-Register evidence is summarized to the few fields agents actually use — keeps responses under ~20KB. Pass true to get full upstream payloads (50KB-500KB) when you need to recompute deltas, cite specific observations, or post-process.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / examples
      Previous value: -[
      -  {
      -    "market": "will-bitcoin-reach-100k-in-july-2026"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "market": "https://polymarket.com/event/will-bitcoin-hit-150k-by-june-30-2026"
      -  }
      -]New value: +[
      +  {
      +    "market": "when-will-bitcoin-hit-150k"
      +  },
      +  {
      +    "market": "https://polymarket.com/event/when-will-bitcoin-hit-150k"
      +  }
      +]
    • changedInput schema / properties / market / description
      Previous value: -"Polymarket slug (\"will-bitcoin-hit-150k-by-june-30-2026\"), full URL (\"https://polymarket.com/event/...\"), or question text (\"Will Bitcoin hit $150k by June 30?\")"New value: +"Polymarket slug (\"when-will-bitcoin-hit-150k\"), full URL (\"https://polymarket.com/event/...\"), or question text (\"Will Bitcoin hit $150k?\"). Dated slugs stop resolving once they settle — Polymarket de-indexes resolved markets — so prefer an undated one."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), yet the description adds substantial behavioral disclosure the annotations cannot: blocking status codes (low_confidence_match, market_closed_or_inactive, market_expired_or_resolved), which fields get suppressed in each case, wide-spread tradeability flagging, GDELT 429 fallback fields, and the resolution-rule risk (flat-50¢ void settlement). This is exactly the extra context a caller needs before sizing anything.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded well (what it does, then input rule, then safety), but roughly 500 words of ALL-CAPS section headers and nested jargon is heavier than needed; several blocks (CLASSIFIERS list, FAN-OUT EXAMPLES, RESPONSE SHAPES) could be trimmed or deferred to referenced documentation. It earns some of its length given the tool's complexity, but not all of it.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-value burden and does so thoroughly: response shapes, market_match_confidence contract, parent_event extractor, news fallback fields, and every terminal status. An agent can interpret the response correctly without any external reference.

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% and the schema descriptions already state the undated-slug caveat, the URL/slug/question text formats, and the include_raw size tradeoff. The description largely restates these rather than adding new parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies even though the surrounding behavior sections add value.

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?

States a specific verb (research), a specific resource (a Polymarket bet via Pipeworx data), and the exact outcome (evidence packet + market-vs-model comparison). It is clearly differentiated from siblings like polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, and polymarket_fill_risk, which do not wrap a single market into a classified fan-out.

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?

Gives concrete invocation phrases ('should I bet on X', 'is there edge in Z') and a prescriptive input rule about preferring undated slugs over dated ones, with the reason. It does not explicitly name which sibling tool to use instead when you want a cross-market edge scan, so the when-not guidance is implicit.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.