Browse prediction markets from Polymarket and Manifold. Filter by category (crypto, politics, sports, economics, science, entertainment, pop-culture) or search by keyword.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | No | Keyword search | |
| tag | No | Category filter (crypto, politics, sports, economics, science, entertainment, pop-culture) | |
| limit | No | Number of results (default 20, max 50) | |
| source | No | polymarket, manifold, or all (default: all) | all |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the data sources (Polymarket, Manifold) and filtering options, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, default behavior (e.g., returns all markets if no filters), or result structure.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by filter options. Every word adds value with no fluff.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite 4 parameters and no output schema, the description omits key context: default behavior when no filters are applied, result format, and pagination. For a browsing tool, this leaves an agent without enough information to understand the full output or navigate common use cases.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all four parameters. The description repeats some parameter info (category filter, keyword search) but adds no substantial new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool browses prediction markets from two specific platforms (Polymarket and Manifold) and supports filtering by category or keyword. This verb+resource combination is precise and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_market_details and get_trending_predictions.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for searching and filtering prediction markets, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings (e.g., for lists vs. details or trending). No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.