polymarket-mcp-server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get Polymarket trades

polymarket_get_trades

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch recent Polymarket trades by market conditionId or wallet address, returning price, size, side, outcome, and timestamps to inspect market activity or wallet history.

Instructions

Get recent trades — either a MARKET's tape (who traded, at what price) or a WALLET's trade history.

Provide market (a conditionId) for the market tape, OR wallet for that address's trades.

Args:

market (string, optional): market conditionId (0x…). Provide this OR wallet.
wallet (string, optional): 0x… address. Provide this OR market.
taker_only (boolean): only taker trades (default true); false adds maker fills for the full tape.
limit (number): max trades, 1-100 (default 20).
response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): default 'markdown'.

Returns: { market, user, count, trades:[{ wallet, name, side, outcome, price, size, usdcSize, timestamp, iso, conditionId, title, slug, transactionHash }] }. Errors: "Provide either 'market' or 'wallet'." if neither is given.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Max trades to return (1-100, default 20).
`market`	No	Market conditionId (0x…) for that market's recent trade tape. Provide this OR wallet.
`wallet`	No	Wallet address for that wallet's trade history. Provide this OR market.
`taker_only`	No	Only taker trades (default true); false adds maker fills for the full tape.
`response_format`	No	Output format: 'markdown' (concise, human-readable; default) or 'json' (full structured data).	markdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`user`	Yes
`count`	Yes
`market`	Yes
`trades`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: the taker-only default and what false adds (maker fills), the limit range, defaults, and the exact error string.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by a structured Args list and Returns/Errors sections, easy to scan. The Args section duplicates the schema somewhat, which costs a bit of efficiency.

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?

Given an output schema exists, return values needn't be re-explained, yet the description still sketches them alongside documented error behavior, defaults, and the mutual-exclusivity rule. Nothing an agent needs to invoke correctly is missing.

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 every parameter including the 'OR' constraint and taker_only. The description's Args section largely restates the schema, adding only marginal clarifying value, which anchors it at the baseline 3.

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 and resource ('Get recent trades') and immediately disambiguates the two modes — a market's tape vs a wallet's trade history. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_user_activity and get_positions.

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?

Explicitly states the selection rule: 'Provide market for the market tape, OR wallet for that address's trades,' and the error case when neither is given. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative for trade history vs activity, so it falls short of a 5.

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