Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-server-polymarket

mcp-server-polymarket

by tukorama
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Check Polymarket services

get_service_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check whether Polymarket's Gamma, CLOB, Data API and Perps services respond and if your network can place orders. Use it to diagnose network errors when other tools fail.

Instructions

Check that Gamma, the CLOB, the Data API and Perps answer, and whether this network's location may place orders (Polymarket's geoblock check). Use it when other tools fail with network errors.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_service_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNo
geoblockYes
servicesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond them by disclosing what is actually probed and that the geoblock result determines whether this network may place orders — a behavioral consequence an agent could not infer from the annotations.

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, front-loaded with what is checked, followed by the invocation condition. No filler or restatement of the title.

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?

With zero parameters, a rich annotation set and an output schema covering the return shape, the description supplies everything needed to decide to call it. A brief note on interpreting partial failures (one service down vs. all) would have made it complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline applies. No misleading parameter claims are made.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific verb ("Check") and enumerates the exact subsystems probed: Gamma, the CLOB, the Data API and Perps, plus a geoblock/order-eligibility dimension. That scope is distinctive against siblings like auth_status or the data-reading tools, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger: "Use it when other tools fail with network errors." That is clear when-to-use guidance, but it offers no when-not (e.g. auth failures should go to auth_status) and no statement about whether it is a diagnostic-only call.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools