Metabolights

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 2026-09-24 · checked 2026-10-20 15:26 UTC

Tool changes

• 2026-09-24release_calendar_marketsremoved

  JOIN of the official release calendar (econ data, the FOMC, FDA decisions, SEC rules) against LIVE Polymarket/Kalshi markets — which scheduled releases land in the next N hours, and which live markets resolve on them. This is a POSITIONING tool, not a speed product: results are cached like every other pack (≤ 60s TTL) and there is no push/webhook — do not use this to try to beat a release, use it to see what is coming and what is already priced. CATEGORIES: econ (CPI, Employment Situation/jobs report, GDP, PCE, PPI, retail sales, housing starts, jobless claims — via fred_release_dates per known release_id, since FRED's own cross-release calendar mostly returns recent actuals, not future dates), fed (the next FOMC meeting's rate decision, via fomc_calendar), fda (PDUFA action dates + FDA advisory-committee meetings, via pdufa_catalysts / fda_adcom_calendar), sec (SEC final rules whose own DATES clause names an effective date in the window, via federal-register recent_rules — usually finds nothing in a short window since SEC rules typically take effect 30–60 days out, which is an accurate answer, not a bug), court (ALWAYS EMPTY today — court-listener has no forward-looking scheduled-hearing calendar, only filing/termination dates, so this category returns zero releases with unsupported:true rather than fabricate one). Omit `categories` or pass "all" for every category. MATCHING AND ITS HONESTY CONTRACT: every release is returned even when it has ZERO matched markets — a release is never dropped just because nothing on Polymarket or Kalshi resolves on it (most FDA/SEC releases will show markets:[]; that is signal, not a gap). Every matched market carries resolves_on_this_release: "true" (the venue's own close/end date sits within ~36h of the release AND the question passed a subject filter — econ and fed only), "likely" (same subject filter, but the venue closes days away from the release date), or "unclear" (a keyword hit with no date to anchor against — always true for the fda category, which has no ladder structure to check a date against). matched_by names the mechanism (a Kalshi series ticker, a Polymarket search query, or an FDA keyword probe) so a caller can judge the match rather than trust a label. scheduled_at carries both `utc` and `et`; econ releases use the standing BLS/Census 8:30am ET convention (FRED's calendar itself has no clock time), FOMC decisions use the 2:00pm ET convention, and FDA/SEC dates are date_only:true (no reliable clock time exists for either). DO NOT treat a matched market as a real arbitrage or a settled fact on its own — a market question sharing tokens with a release name is not proof it settles on that release's own published number. Call resolution_audit / resolution_diff (fleet #1909) on a specific market before sizing anything here. An empty window (zero releases across every requested category) returns error:"no_releases_in_window" with a widen-the-window hint rather than an empty array — econ releases especially cluster on specific dates each month, so a 48h window often straddles a dead stretch.

• 2026-09-24resolution_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.

• 2026-09-24resolution_auditremoved

  Extract the settlement clause of a single Polymarket or Kalshi market: who publishes the settling number (source), the clock time + timezone it is taken at, the precision of the computation (e.g. "1-minute candle close" vs "60-second trailing average" vs "election outcome"), the evidence standard (official_source | consensus_reporting | any_credible_report | unspecified), and void_handling (cancellation/postponement settlement — reused verbatim from bet_research's cancellation_rule detector, not re-derived). Parses Polymarket's `description` field (fetched via polymarket_market) or Kalshi's `rules_primary` + `rules_secondary` fields (fetched via kalshi_market) with regex + a small vocabulary — no LLM pass, so an unusual clause reports confidence:"low" rather than a guess. Pass `market` as a Polymarket slug/URL or a Kalshi market ticker (e.g. "KXBTCD-26SEP1317-T66999.99"); a Kalshi EVENT ticker (e.g. "KXBTCD-26SEP1317") also works — it picks one representative market under that event, since the settlement mechanism is normally shared across all strikes/legs in one event. Use this before treating a polymarket_kalshi_spread row as a real arbitrage: two ladders that look alike can settle on different sources, at different times, with different precision — this tool is how you check. Pair with resolution_diff to compare two markets directly. KNOWN GAP: idiosyncratic phrasing that doesn't match the vocabulary returns confidence:"low" and evidence_standard:"unspecified" rather than an LLM-guessed answer.

• 2026-09-24kalshi_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").

• 2026-09-24polymarket_edge_trackerremoved

  Edge persistence and decay telemetry built from daily polymarket_edges snapshots. Answers "how long has this edge existed and is it shrinking?" — a fresh wide edge and a 3-week-old wide edge are different trades (the latter is wide for a reason nobody is willing to take). Args: days (lookback, default 14, max 30), window (snapshot family, default "1wk"). RESPONSE: tracked[] = every opportunity in the LATEST snapshot with its full edge_pp_net time-series across prior snapshots, first_seen, trend (new | widening | stable | decaying) and decay_pp_per_day (both computed on |edge_pp_net| — the value itself is signed by trade direction, negative = SELL YES); expired[] = opportunities that appeared in earlier snapshots but are GONE from the latest (closed, resolved, or arbed away) with their lifespan_days — the median lifespan is your competition clock; snapshot_dates[] = which days actually have data (snapshots are written when polymarket_edges runs on a cache-miss, so gaps mean nobody scanned that day). LIMITS: history depth is bounded by the 60-day snapshot TTL and starts from when snapshotting was enabled; decay numbers come from daily closes of edge_pp_net (net of default slippage AND Polymarket's own taker fee — see polymarket_edges), not intraday.

• 2026-09-24discover_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).

• 2026-09-24deep_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 1674 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 6,402 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).

• 2026-09-24search_withinremoved

  Semantic search INSIDE a fetched record. Pass the text you already pulled (e.g. a SEC 10-K body, an article, a long tool result) plus a natural-language query; get back the top-N passages with character offsets and similarity scores. Use when the record is too big to cram into the prompt — search_within saves context, returns only the passages that matter, and every passage carries an offset so the agent can verify a verbatim quote. Pairs with ask_pipeworx_grounded: fetch with the gateway, ground over the relevant passages instead of the whole document. BGE-base-en embeddings + cosine over 500-char overlapping windows; cap is 200K chars (longer inputs are truncated and flagged).

• 2026-09-24ask_pipeworx_groundedremoved

  Hallucination-resistant answer mode for high-stakes reads. Same routing as ask_pipeworx — picks the right tool from 6,402 across 1674 sources, fills arguments, fetches the data — then EXTRACTS the answer using ONLY what the tool result contains. Returns {answer, evidence (verbatim quote), confidence, source, fetched_at, refusal_reason:null} on success, OR an explicit refusal {answer:null, refusal_reason:"not_in_source"|"no_tool_match"|"tool_error"|"data_truncated"|"llm_error"} when the data doesn't directly answer. Use whenever an answer will be quoted, cited, or acted on, and the agent must not invent facts (financial verdicts, legal claims, medical lookups, public statements). Costs one extra LLM call vs ask_pipeworx — prefer ask_pipeworx for casual lookups.

• 2026-09-24ask_pipeworx_betaremoved

  Beta version of ask_pipeworx: identical universal router (same 6,402 tools, same arguments, same response shape) with candidate routing improvements enabled live whenever one is under test. No candidate is active right now (the last was retired on outcome evidence 2026-07-26), so this currently matches ask_pipeworx exactly. Use it exactly like ask_pipeworx when you want the newest routing; results are compared against the stable router to decide what merges. Falls back to nothing — this IS a full working router, just the experimental edge.

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.