Skip to main content
Glama
707,494 tools. Updated 2026-10-27 01:49

"Codeforces" matching MCP tools:

  • Codeforces competitive-programming API — the submission history of one Codeforces handle, newest first, paged with from/count. Each submission carries the contest and problem it targeted, the judge verdict (OK, WRONG_ANSWER, TIME_LIMIT_EXCEEDED), programming language, runtime and memory consumed. Answers which problems a Codeforces user attempted lately and whether they passed.
    ConnectorNo auth

Matching MCP Servers

Matching MCP Connectors

  • Codeforces MCP — public read API.

  • Search Codeforces problems and inspect public problem metadata through the official Codeforces API.

  • Codeforces competitive-programming site — the global recent-actions feed, the newest blog entries and comments posted anywhere on Codeforces. Each action returns its timestamp plus the blog entry (title, author handle, rating) or comment text it refers to. Answers what the Codeforces community is posting and discussing right now.
    ConnectorNo auth
  • Search Codeforces problems by rating range and tags, with OR/AND topic matching, and sort by recent or oldest. Returns up to 10 problems with names, ratings, tags, and links.
    MIT
  • Fetch the full problem statement, rating, and topics for a Codeforces problem using its contest ID and index.
    MIT
  • Selects a random Codeforces problem within ±300 rating of your current rating, ignoring weaknesses for a fresh and challenging practice.
    MIT
  • Analyzes your solved Codeforces problems to identify weak topics and recommends up to 3 practice problems within +300 of your rating.
    MIT
  • Fetch a Codeforces user's complete profile including rating, contests, problems solved, and top categories.
    MIT
  • Retrieve a Codeforces user's last 1000 submissions to see AC/WA/TLE counts and details of their 20 most recent attempts.
    MIT
  • Analyzes your last 10 rated Codeforces contests and recommends up to 2 unsolved problems per contest, based on rating constraints, to help you improve your rank.
    MIT
  • Compare two Codeforces users side-by-side to analyze ratings, titles, contest count, and problem solving breakdown by difficulty and category.
    MIT
  • Find arbitrage opportunities on Polymarket via monotonicity violations + partition-sum checks. Call with NO args for a `trending_scan` of the top ~200 markets by weekly volume; pass `event` for the strongest per-event partition_check, or `topic` for a themed cross-event scan. `event` (recommended for a specific market): pass a Polymarket event slug like "fed-decision-may-2026" or "when-will-bitcoin-hit-150k"; walks child markets, checks date-axis / threshold-axis ordering AND computes the partition_check (sum of YES prices across mutually-exclusive legs — should ≈1; deviations >3pp emit a BUY/SELL EVERY LEG signal). `topic` (for cross-event scanning): pass a seed question like "Strait of Hormuz traffic returns to normal" or "Fed rate decision"; searches related events across the platform, flattens markets, runs the comparator on the union. Cross-event mode catches "...by May 31" vs "...by Jun 30" patterns that single-event misses. SEMANTIC ANCHOR: cross-event pairs require ≥0.30 Jaccard similarity on question tokens (prevents Powell-Fed-Pause being paired with Powell-DOJ-probe); skipped_low_similarity surfaces the rejected pair count. PARTITION FILTER: drops will-person-X / will-manager-Y / will-someone-else- placeholder slugs; partitions with >20% placeholder fraction return null arb signal. Response: opportunities[] (gap_pp, suggested_trade, reasoning, monotonicity violation context), and in event mode partition_check{sum_yes_prices, gap_from_1, placeholders_filtered, suggested_trade}. FEES: every opportunities[] row and partition_check.arbitrage carry edge_pp_gross (== gap_pp / overround_pp), fees_pp, edge_pp_net, net_positive, plus polymarket_fee_pp, fee_basis and fee_categories[]. BOTH cost components are modeled: Polymarket's own per-category TAKER FEE (fee = shares × rate × p × (1-p), rates crypto 0.07 / sports-economics-culture-weather-other 0.05 / finance-politics-mentions-tech 0.04, geopolitics and world events fee-free; verified against Polymarket's own docs as of 2026-09-13) and Polygon gas (~$0.02/leg). The taker fee dominates: ~$1.75 per 100 shares on a crypto market at 50c versus $0.02 of gas, so rows that looked profitable before fleet #1927 may now show net_positive:false — that is the correction, not a regression. Each leg is priced at ITS OWN market's rate and price (the fee curve peaks at 50c and falls toward both extremes). fee_basis says where the rate came from: 'payload' (read off the market, the normal case), 'category' (mapped from its fee category), 'fee_free', or 'fallback' (rate unknown — charged at the modal 0.05 rather than assumed free, so an unreadable market is never reported as costless). Where fill_check reprices against live depth, this does NOT double-count that spread cost. FILL CHECK: when the partition signal fires, arbitrage.fill_check prices it against live CLOB depth (theoretical_edge_pp_at_book vs realizable_edge_pp at 1000 shares/leg, thin_legs[]) — realizable_edge_pp ≤ 0 means the overround exists only at last-trade, not in the book; do not trade it. For custom sizing use polymarket_fill_risk.
    ConnectorNo auth
  • Prices Kalshi daily high-temperature markets against the NWS forecast for the market's OWN settlement station, and measures whether that forecast actually beats the market. Two modes. LIVE (default): returns the full strike ladder for one city and settlement date with market_prob (mid), forecast_prob, and edge_pp per strike, plus the settlement clause verbatim. BACKTEST (`backtest_days: N`): scores an archived gridded forecast against the market on settled days and returns brier_market vs brier_forecast with a plain-English `verdict`, so the edge is MEASURED rather than asserted. READ THE WARNINGS — they are not boilerplate. (1) These markets DO NOT settle on the NWS. They settle on The Weather Company (weather.com) at a Kalshi station code such as CLINYC, which the response quotes verbatim; so part of every edge_pp is NWS-vs-Weather-Company disagreement about the same day at the same station, which is not mispricing and not tradeable. `settlement_vs_forecast_basis_f` from backtest mode is that part as a number. (2) The station is DERIVED from the settlement clause, never from the city name: Chicago settles at MIDWAY and New York at CENTRAL PARK, so a city-centre forecast would misprice a whole ladder. A station that cannot be resolved yields rows with no forecast and a reason, never a guessed coordinate. (3) forecast_prob assumes a normal distribution around the NWS high whose width is ASSUMED, not fitted (stated in `distribution_assumption`) — run backtest mode to see whether it is calibrated. (4) edge_pp is gross: no Kalshi fees, no bid-ask. MEASURED RESULT, AND IT IS NOT THE FLATTERING ONE: on the first backtest (KXHIGHNY, 13 settled days to 2026-09-11, 58 market observations) the MARKET beat the forecast — Brier 0.1008 for the market against 0.1594 for the archived gridded forecast, lower being better. So on that sample there is NO forecast edge to sell, and a large edge_pp is more likely to be the model disagreeing with a better-informed market than an opportunity. The measured settlement-vs-forecast basis was 1.7F mean absolute over 8 pinnable days, slightly warm-biased, which is a big share of a typical edge_pp on a 2-degree bracket. Re-run backtest_days before believing any edge; if a later sample reverses this, the numbers say so. NWS is US-only, so the ~30 international Kalshi weather series (London, Paris, Tokyo) return market prices with forecast_unavailable rather than a forecast. Precipitation series are listed but not yet priced. Cities: nyc, chicago, los angeles, miami, austin, houston, denver, philadelphia — or pass `series_ticker` for any other (e.g. "KXHIGHTBOS").
    ConnectorNo auth
  • Claygent-style per-row research: answer ONE question about ONE company and return a JSON object matching your output_schema, with every field wrapped in its own evidence — {value, evidence_url, quote, status}. status is NEVER self-reported by the model: "found" means this code independently verified the model's quote is a VERBATIM substring of text actually fetched; "inferred" means a value was given but the quote could not be verified; "not_established" means no source answered the field, and its value is always null — never guessed, never a blended score. Sources: "web" fetches the company's own site (entity.domain required — homepage, /about, /leadership) via fetch_url; "catalog" checks entity_profile (SEC EDGAR; resolved:false for a private company is expected, not a failure); "both" (default) tries both. max_cost (USD, default 0.02, max 0.50) scales how many pages are fetched and refuses up front if it is too small to pay for even one extraction call (floor $0.002) — never silently overspends. A row where every source comes back empty costs nothing: every field is mechanically not_established with NO model call made. For a boolean/derived field (e.g. "does this company sell to healthcare"), the quote only has to SUPPORT the value — a descriptive sentence about customers/products counts, the source need not state the answer verbatim. leadership_page_status ("fetched"|"not_found"|"not_attempted", plus leadership_note) says plainly whether a leadership/team page was actually read, so a named-person field (head_of_sales) coming back not_established is distinguishable from "this company just doesn't publish one" vs. "we never checked". model_output_empty:true means the model returned nothing usable (a transport/budget problem) — every field is not_established for THAT reason, never read as 20 individual "no" judgments. Use with a fixed question + schema across many rows for "Claygent over N companies with a hard cost cap" (composes with batch callers). For picking from a fixed label list instead of extracting open fields, use classify_row (cheaper, one model call).
    ConnectorNo auth
  • Tell the Pipeworx team something is broken, missing, or needs to exist. Use when a tool returns wrong/stale data (bug), when a tool you wish existed isn't in the catalog (feature/data_gap), or when something worked surprisingly well (praise). ONLY for tools served by this Pipeworx connection — if the tool came from a different MCP server in your client (another vendor's Gmail, Splunk, Slack, etc. connector), we cannot fix it and reporting it here only delays you; file it with that server instead. Not sure? Pipeworx tool names are the ones this connection lists. Describe the issue in terms of Pipeworx tools/packs — don't paste the end-user's prompt. Filing without an account returns a `claim_token`; pass it back later as pipeworx_feedback({claim_token:"pwfb_…"}) to read whether it was fixed and what changed. The team reads digests daily and signal directly affects roadmap. Rate-limited to 5 per identifier per day. Free; doesn't count against your tool-call quota.
    ConnectorNo auth