list_recent_signalsPublic feed of signals opened and closed in the last few hours (up to 24), newest first: ticker, action, publisher, status, entry and exit price, and P&L for closed signals. Can include confluence events.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum events (1-100). | |
| since_hours | No | Look back this many hours (max 24). | |
| include_confluences | No | Also include confluence opened/closed events. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations cover readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds useful context: the feed is public, recency-bounded to 24h, newest-first ordering, and can include confluence events. It does not disclose pagination behavior or what 'last few hours' precisely means alongside the since_hours param.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One dense sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose and recency window, then the field list. Tight and efficient, though the trailing 'Can include confluence events' is slightly redundant with the include_confluences parameter.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
No output schema exists, so the description usefully enumerates returned fields (ticker, action, publisher, status, entry/exit price, P&L), which is the right call. For a read-only list tool with full schema coverage and annotation support, it is complete enough; return ordering is mentioned, though pagination semantics are not.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents limit, since_hours, and include_confluences. The description restates the defaults (24 hours, confluence inclusion) without adding format or syntax beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Specific verb+resource (lists a public feed of signals) with scope (last few hours, up to 24, newest first) and enumerated output fields. Distinguishable from sibling list_my_signals (private) and list_confluences via the public/feed framing.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The 'Public feed' framing and the time-bounded scope imply when this tool fits (recent public activity). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like list_my_signals or list_confluences, nor state when not to use it. Usage is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.