Devdocs Io

Quality – / 100not scored

Not scored: fewer than three checks apply, usually because no remote answered a credential-free probe or the server is a local package.

Tool list unknown · tools last changed 2026-10-19 · checked 2026-10-20 09:31 UTC

Tool changes

• 2026-10-19scan_competitor_ai_presenceremoved

  Compare AI visibility across multiple entities side-by-side. Probes each entity (your brand + N competitors) with ai_visibility_check, ranks by score, surfaces which is most/least recognized. Useful for competitive AI-marketing audits: "does Claude know about us as well as our competitors?". Returns ranked list with score, confidence, signal density per entity.

• 2026-10-19ai_visibility_checkremoved

  Probe one or more LLMs for what they know about a business / brand / product / topic and score visibility (0-100) per model. Default model is Workers AI Llama-3.3-70b (free); pass `_apiKey` to also probe Anthropic (BYO key — you pay Anthropic directly for those calls). Returns per-model {score, confidence, signals, raw_response} + a combined view. Useful for AI-marketing audits, pre-launch brand checks, competitive monitoring.

• 2026-10-19suggest_questionsremoved

  What can I ask Pipeworx? / what is Pipeworx good for? / what can you do? / give me ideas / show me examples / getting started / what data do you have? — the onboarding entry point for an agent that just connected and wants to know what is worth asking. Returns category-bucketed example questions (company financials, drugs & clinical trials, economics, real estate, prediction markets, weather, government & patents, science & academia, news) — each with the exact tool + argument shape that answers it, drawn from the live catalog of thousands of tools. Call with no arguments for the full spread, or pass `topic` (e.g. "finance", "pharma", "betting") to focus. Use this FIRST when you do not yet know what Pipeworx can do for you, or to learn how to call the meta-tools (ask_pipeworx, entity_profile, compare_entities, etc.).

• 2026-10-19resolution_diffremoved

  Field-by-field diff of TWO markets' settlement clauses (one from each of `a` and `b`; either can be Polymarket or Kalshi) — runs resolution_audit on both sides and compares source, settle time, precision, and evidence standard. Returns `equivalent`: "true" only when both sides parsed with enough confidence to compare AND no field conflicts; "false" when a specific conflict was found (differing_fields names which — e.g. ["source","settle_time"] for a Polymarket Bitcoin market settling on Binance's 1-minute candle at noon ET versus a Kalshi KXBTCD market settling on CF Benchmarks' BRTI 60-second average at 5pm EDT — SAME asset, DIFFERENT contract); "unclear" when one or both sides could not be confidently parsed (an absence of evidence is not evidence of equivalence — read raw_clause yourself in that case). Only flags a field as differing when BOTH sides gave a SPECIFIC comparable answer — a named source (e.g. "Associated Press, Fox News, NBC") against a generic one (e.g. Kalshi's "consensus of media organizations") is treated as the same evidence standard, not a conflict, since that is standard election-market boilerplate on both venues. Use this before sizing a polymarket_kalshi_spread pair as a real cross-venue arb, or standalone to sanity-check any two markets you suspect settle on different things.

• 2026-10-19kalshi_weather_edgeremoved

  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").

• 2026-10-19bet_researchremoved

  Research a Polymarket bet by pulling the relevant Pipeworx data for it in one call. Pass a market slug ("will-kristi-noem-win-the-2028-republican-presidential-nomination"), a polymarket.com URL, or a question text. Prefer an UNDATED slug: a dated one ("...-by-june-30-2026") stops resolving the day it settles, because Polymarket de-indexes resolved markets. The tool resolves the market, classifies the bet, fans out to category-specific data packs in parallel, and returns an evidence packet + simple market-vs-model comparison. Use for "should I bet on X", "what does the data say about Y", or "is there edge in Z". CLASSIFIERS: crypto_price, fed_rate, geopolitical, sports, sports_championship, drug_approval, election_candidate, tech_launch, space_launch, corporate, corporate_earnings, corporate_event, public_figure_speech, weather, other. FAN-OUT EXAMPLES: BTC bet → coingecko + fred + gdelt+gnews; Fed bet → fred (DFEDTARU + EFFR + CPIAUCSL) + kalshi_macro (KXFED implied probs) + recent_fed_actions (federal-register rules, last 365d); Hormuz bet → imf_portwatch + airspace + gdelt; Yankees WS → mlb_stats_standings + parent_event partition + news; hottest-year bet → climate_projection_nyc + gistemp_latest (NASA global anomaly, rank since 1880) + news; NVDA-vs-AAPL → finnhub get_quote + edgar shares-outstanding (derived market cap) + edgar filings + news. RESPONSE SHAPES: result.market carries best_bid/best_ask/spread_pp/liquidity/price_change_1h/1d/1w; result.analysis carries model_probability/edge_pp/kelly_fraction_half when a closed-form model fires PLUS a 24h-move warning ("Market moved X.Xpp in 24h, comparable to model edge — your edge may already be priced in") when relevant; result.evidence is keyed by source. RESOLVER CONTRACT: result.market_match_confidence ∈ {high, medium, low, none}, market_match_score (0-1 token-overlap), market_match_alternatives[] (other candidate markets the resolver considered), and suggestions[] (explicit re-query hints when the match is fuzzy) — ALWAYS inspect these before trusting the analysis block, because medium/low matches can still surface other fields. PARENT_EVENT EXTRACTOR: when the bet is one leg of a partition (Yankees WS, Romania election), result.parent_event{matched_candidate, top_legs_by_price[], partition_size, placeholders_filtered} gives you the peer prices in one place — that's the headline for elections/championships. NEWS FIELDS: news entries carry _fallback_attempted / _fallback_failed_reason / retry_after_sec when GDELT 429s and GNews backfill ran or failed. SAFETY: low-confidence resolutions short-circuit with status:"low_confidence_match" and suppress analysis fields so agents can't accidentally size on phantom matches. Closed/dead markets that ARE still indexed by Polymarket (yes_price≈0, no volume, no liquidity) return status:"market_closed_or_inactive" and skip fan-out. A market whose own deadline has already passed returns status:"market_expired_or_resolved" + expired_deadline (the date), which is deliberately NOT the same answer as low_confidence_match: your slug was right and is merely settled, so the useful retry is the successor market for the same question, not a corrected spelling. In practice resolved markets are usually de-indexed and instead surface via one of those two paths — both routes are BLOCKING, just different mechanisms. Wide-spread markets (>10pp) carry tradeability:"illiquid_wide_spread" + an explanatory note. RESOLUTION-RULE RISK: market.cancellation_rule parses the void/postponement settlement out of the resolution text — refund_50_50 (shares settle flat 50¢ on void; EV-material for any entry away from 50¢, with ev_impact quantified), resolves_no_on_cancel, resolves_yes_on_cancel, carries_to_reschedule, or mentioned_unclear. null means the description never mentions cancellation. Check this before sizing sports/esports/event-occurrence bets — audited arb-bot ledgers show flat-50¢ void settlements are a recurring pure-rules loss.

• 2026-10-19discover_toolsremoved

  Find tools by describing the data or task. Use when you need to browse, search, look up, or discover what tools exist for: SEC filings, financials, revenue, profit, FDA drugs, adverse events, FRED economic data, Census demographics, BLS jobs/unemployment/inflation, ATTOM real estate, ClinicalTrials, USPTO patents, weather, news, crypto, stocks. Returns the top-N most relevant tools with names, descriptions, and full input schemas (with curated examples) — each result is ready to call directly, no second schema lookup needed. Call this FIRST when you have many tools available and want to see the option set (not just one answer).

• 2026-10-19deep_researchremoved

  ACCOUNT REQUIRED (free — sign in via GitHub at https://pipeworx.io/signup; depth:"thorough" needs a paid plan). If you are not signed in, use ask_pipeworx instead — it works on every tier. Grounded multi-source research across Pipeworx's 1834 STRUCTURED data sources (SEC filings, FRED/BLS economics, FDA, USPTO patents, markets, science, government records, etc.) in ONE call — this is NOT open-web search. Decomposes your question into focused facets, routes each to the right one of 6,985 tools IN PARALLEL, and returns a findings packet: verbatim evidence + confidence + source + fetched_at + a stable pipeworx:// citation per finding, with explicit gaps[] for facets the data couldn't answer (never invented). Best for broad/multi-part questions over structured data ("compare X and Y's regulatory + financial exposure", "research the filings + market picture for ACME"). For a single lookup use ask_pipeworx (one LLM call, not many). For BREAKING or colloquial CURRENT-NEWS / "what's the world saying about X" topics, prefer ask_pipeworx — it routes to live news APIs and the *-news-feeds packs; deep_research returns mostly empty gaps[] when the topic isn't in the structured catalog. Second-hop iteration: depth:"standard" re-angles unanswered gaps (gap recovery); depth:"thorough" additionally chases the best leads from the first pass — so multi-step questions resolve in one call. Every finding carries a `hop` field and a citation_uri — a resolvable pipeworx:// record URI, present only when the source emits one that resources/read can actually serve, so a citation you get back is always fetchable. "standard" and "thorough" also return contradictions[] flagging findings that disagree. Large records are semantically excerpted to the passages relevant to each facet (not head-truncated), so answers deep in a long filing/series aren't missed. Expect 15-60s (thorough with its follow-up + contradiction pass: up to ~90s).

• 2026-10-19entryremoved

  Single entry HTML.

• 2026-10-19generate_llms_txtremoved

  Generate a production-ready llms.txt file for any URL so AI crawlers (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity) can index the site cleanly. Fetches the page, extracts title/description/key links, and emits the standard llms.txt markdown format. Output is a single text blob ready to drop at site-root/llms.txt. Useful for: getting a client's site indexed by AI, drafting llms.txt for your own project, or auditing how an AI crawler would see a competitor.

Showing the latest 10. Full history: list_changes · trend: quality JSON.

Checks run on what our credential-free, read-only probes observe; tools are never called and no code audit is performed. How it is computed.