@true402.dev/mcp-server

prediction_markets

Keyword-search live prediction markets across Polymarket, Limitless, and Manifold; returns normalized markets (probability outcomes, USD volume, close date). POST { query, limit? }.

Instructions

Keyword-search live prediction markets across Polymarket, Limitless, and Manifold; returns normalized markets (probability outcomes, USD volume, close date). POST { query, limit? }. Unpaid: free while the caller's IP has free-trial calls left that day (a small daily allowance shared across the trial stalls, no wallet); otherwise returns 402. Flat-priced per request. (PAID x402 service — USDC on Base; the MCP server needs a funded wallet to settle.) Price: $0.005 USD (fixed).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "prediction_markets"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Max markets returned across all venues, 1–50 (default 20)
`query`	Yes	Keyword to search market questions

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.3.0Oct 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses important traits: the service is paid via x402/USDC on Base, requires a funded wallet, returns 402 when free-trial calls are exhausted, and has a fixed $0.005 price. It does not cover broader error behavior or rate-limit details beyond the daily trial allowance, so it falls short of complete transparency.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded and the payment details are relevant for a paid service. There is minor redundancy between 'Flat-priced per request' and the explicit fixed price, but the description is not bloated and each major sentence serves a purpose.

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

Completeness4/5

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 usefully names the normalized return fields: probability outcomes, USD volume, and close date. It also explains the free-trial and 402 behavior. It is nearly complete, though it could be more explicit about freshness or response structure.

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 input schema already documents both parameters. The description repeats the POST shape 'query, limit?' but adds no additional syntax, filtering behavior, or semantics beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Keyword-search'), resource ('live prediction markets'), venue scope (Polymarket, Limitless, Manifold), and return shape. No sibling tool overlaps with prediction markets, so an agent can route to it without opening another schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the purpose: use it to search live prediction markets. It explains free-trial versus paid conditions, but does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. Since sibling tools are unrelated, the lack of routing guidance is less damaging but still a gap.

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