Find prediction markets closing within a chosen timeframe, sorted by closing time. Specify hours ahead and result limit to identify expiring opportunities.
Get markets closing within specified timeframe. Returns markets sorted by closing time.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hours | No | Number of hours to look ahead (default 24) | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of results (default 20) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions one behavioral trait—results are sorted by closing time—but does not disclose other relevant behaviors such as whether only active markets are included, how the timeframe relates to the hours parameter, or any pagination limits beyond the schema. This is minimal but not misleading.
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 with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the additional detail about sorting is placed second. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.
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?
For a simple read-only list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is reasonably complete. It states what is returned and the ordering, which is enough for an agent to invoke it. Minor gaps exist (e.g., what 'markets' includes), but they are not critical for correct invocation.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'specified timeframe' loosely maps to the 'hours' parameter, but it adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already documents. The description does not clarify the interplay between hours and limit or the default values.
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 verb 'Get', the resource 'markets', and the specific qualifier 'closing within specified timeframe' plus the sorting behavior. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_trending_markets or get_featured_markets, though it does not explicitly name any sibling.
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 when to use the tool (when you want markets closing soon) but gives no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which alternative (e.g., search_markets, filter_markets_by_category) to choose instead. No exclusion criteria or decision rules are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.