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

mcp-server-polymarket

by tukorama
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

List a market's top holders

list_market_holders
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the largest holders for each outcome of a Polymarket market, netted per wallet, with optional entry price and PnL data.

Instructions

The largest holders of each outcome of a market, netted per wallet.

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": {
      "condition_id": "<condition_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_market_holders"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHolders per outcome.
cursorNonext_cursor from the previous page. Empty starts at the top.
min_sharesNoMinimum holding.
include_pnlNoAdd each holder's entry price and PnL.
condition_idYesThe market's condition id.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokensYes
next_cursorNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations — that holdings are netted per wallet — but does not cover ordering guarantees, completeness of the holder set, or pagination edges.

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?

A single compact sentence with the key scoping detail (per outcome, netted per wallet) front-loaded. No wasted wording, though it is arguably too terse for a paginated tool.

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?

The output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the schema fully documents parameters. However, for a paginated, filterable holder-listing tool, the description omits any note on ordering (by size), pagination flow, or how netting interacts with min_shares.

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 every parameter (limit, cursor, min_shares, include_pnl, condition_id) is already documented. The description adds nothing about parameter semantics beyond the resource itself, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource (largest holders of each outcome of a market) with a qualifying behavior (netted per wallet). It is clearly distinct from sibling listing tools like list_positions or get_market, though it does not name an alternative explicitly.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given; the description does not point to alternatives such as list_positions or get_market_trading_info for related holder/position data. The agent must infer usage purely from the resource name.

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