Skip to main content
Glama

Polymarket Arbitrage Changes

pm_arb_changes

Fetch recent updates to arbitrage opportunities on Polymarket since a given timestamp. Query cost: $0.005 per request.

Instructions

Get recent changes to Polymarket arbitrage data since a given timestamp. Cost: $0.005 per query. Source: Polymarket spread analysis.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sinceYesISO 8601 timestamp to get changes since (e.g. 2026-03-01T00:00:00Z)
limitNoMaximum results (default 50)

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the pm_arb_changes tool logic. It calls the API endpoint /api/v1/pm/arb/changes with a 'since' ISO 8601 timestamp and optional 'limit', formats the response, and returns the results as text content.
      async ({ since, limit }) => {
        const res = await apiGet<PmArbQueryResponse>("/api/v1/pm/arb/changes", {
          since,
          limit: limit ?? 50,
        });
    
        if (!res.ok) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text" as const,
                text: `API error (${res.status}): ${JSON.stringify(res.data)}`,
              },
            ],
            isError: true,
          };
        }
    
        const { count, data } = res.data;
        const warn = stalenessWarning(res);
        const summary = `${warn}Found ${count} arbitrage change(s) since ${since}.`;
        const json = JSON.stringify(data, null, 2);
    
        return {
          content: [{ type: "text" as const, text: `${summary}\n\n${json}` }],
        };
      },
    );
  • The input schema for pm_arb_changes, defined using Zod. Accepts 'since' (required ISO 8601 timestamp) and 'limit' (optional integer 1-100, default 50).
    inputSchema: {
      since: z
        .string()
        .describe("ISO 8601 timestamp to get changes since (e.g. 2026-03-01T00:00:00Z)"),
      limit: z
        .number()
        .int()
        .min(1)
        .max(100)
        .optional()
        .describe("Maximum results (default 50)"),
    },
  • Registration of the tool via server.registerTool('pm_arb_changes', ...) within the registerPmArbTools function.
    server.registerTool(
      "pm_arb_changes",
      {
        title: "Polymarket Arbitrage Changes",
        description:
          "Get recent changes to Polymarket arbitrage data since a given timestamp. " +
          "Cost: $0.005 per query. Source: Polymarket spread analysis.",
        inputSchema: {
          since: z
            .string()
            .describe("ISO 8601 timestamp to get changes since (e.g. 2026-03-01T00:00:00Z)"),
          limit: z
            .number()
            .int()
            .min(1)
            .max(100)
            .optional()
            .describe("Maximum results (default 50)"),
        },
      },
      async ({ since, limit }) => {
        const res = await apiGet<PmArbQueryResponse>("/api/v1/pm/arb/changes", {
          since,
          limit: limit ?? 50,
        });
    
        if (!res.ok) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text" as const,
                text: `API error (${res.status}): ${JSON.stringify(res.data)}`,
              },
            ],
            isError: true,
          };
        }
    
        const { count, data } = res.data;
        const warn = stalenessWarning(res);
        const summary = `${warn}Found ${count} arbitrage change(s) since ${since}.`;
        const json = JSON.stringify(data, null, 2);
    
        return {
          content: [{ type: "text" as const, text: `${summary}\n\n${json}` }],
        };
      },
    );
  • src/index.ts:28-28 (registration)
    Import of registerPmArbTools from the pm_arb module.
    import { registerPmArbTools } from "./tools/pm_arb.js";
  • src/index.ts:55-55 (registration)
    Invocation of registerPmArbTools(server) to wire the tool into the MCP server.
    registerPmArbTools(server);
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It adds cost ($0.005 per query) and source, but omits critical details: data freshness, rate limits, pagination behavior (though limit parameter hints), whether the tool is read-only, or what constitutes a 'change'. The bare minimum is provided; more context is needed for safe invocation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences with zero fluff. First sentence states purpose and core behavior; second adds cost and source. Front-loaded and efficient. Every clause earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Tool is simple (2 params, no output schema, no nested objects). The description covers purpose, cost, and source. However, it lacks explanation of output structure, data freshness, or what 'changes' entails (e.g., incremental updates vs full diff). Without an output schema, the agent lacks expectations on return format, making it less complete than ideal.

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% (both parameters have descriptions). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. The 'since' parameter is detailed with an example format, and 'limit' has min/max/default. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 retrieves recent changes to Polymarket arbitrage data since a given timestamp. The verb 'Get', resource 'recent changes to Polymarket arbitrage data', and scope 'since a given timestamp' are explicit. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like pm_arb_opportunities (which likely lists current opportunities) and pm_arb_stats (aggregate statistics).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With numerous Polymarket-related siblings (e.g., pm_arb_opportunities, pm_arb_stats, pm_changes), the description does not clarify the specific scenario for using 'changes' versus other tools. No exclusion or context about prerequisites or limitations is provided.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/carrierone/verilexdata-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server