jawz

Get event calendar

get_event_calendar

Read-only

Scheduled US macro events (FOMC + CPI + NFP + PCE) with dates and consensus. Consensus values are Mako-curated and arrive with provenance (source, source_url, published_at, age_days). An event with no curated consensus carries consensus: null, which means the value is not published rather than zero. Mode 1.2 covers the qualitative-scenario path for events whose consensus is not published. consensus_metrics_expected lists the metric keys a complete consensus would carry for that event type. Market-implied pricing (what_is_priced / CME FedWatch) is a separate quantity and remains deferred. COVERAGE: only fomc, cpi, nfp and pce have dates in this calendar. ecb, boj and boe are accepted for consistency with the consensus vocabulary but carry NO dates, so filtering to them returns an empty list and says so in staleness_flags — that is 'not tracked here', never 'none is scheduled'. Coverage also runs to a fixed last date; a window past it is flagged rather than silently short.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`event_types`	No	Filter by event types (default: fomc, cpi, nfp, pce). Only those four carry dates; ecb/boj/boe return empty with a staleness flag.
`lookahead_days`	No	How many days forward to look (default 14)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`as_of`	No
`events`	No
`data_sources`	No
`terms_glossary`	No
`staleness_flags`	No

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly and destructive annotations, the description discloses the null-means-unpublished semantics, the fixed-end coverage with staleness flagging, and the provenance/consensus_metrics_expected behavior. These are non-obvious edge cases an agent must know before calling the tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, and each subsequent sentence adds an essential caveat such as null semantics, coverage limits, and deferred pricing. There is no filler or repetition of schema fields; the COVERAGE block condenses several edge cases efficiently.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given that an output schema exists, the description needn't explain return fields, yet it still covers every non-obvious behavior: null consensus, staleness flags, coverage end date, and unsupported event types. An agent has everything needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the input schema, including defaults and the special event_types behavior, so the schema carries the semantic burden. The description restates this coverage without adding meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a precise verb-resource pairing: it returns scheduled US macro events (FOMC, CPI, NFP, PCE) with dates and curated consensus. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling data-query tools by naming the exact event coverage and the consensus/provenance payload.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states that ecb/boj/boe are accepted but return no dates (empty list with a staleness flag), and that market-implied pricing is deferred elsewhere. It also points to Mode 1.2 as the alternative path for unpriced consensus, giving the agent an explicit routing cue.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All jawz tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target clearly distinct resources—regime, liquidity, conditions, prices, ETF profiles, data health—and the three history tools are explicitly separated as price, flow, and judgment. The main ambiguity is get_chapter vs run_chapter, which both return chapter framework content and differ only in usage logging, though the descriptions call this out explicitly.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set follows a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: get_ for reads, list_ for enumeration, run_ for framework text, and score_ for position drift. The only wrinkle is run_chapter/get_chapter, where 'run' doesn't mean execution but rather 'return framework text and log usage,' making the verb semantics slightly less predictable.

Tool Count4/5

22 tools is on the heavy side but the set is organized into recognizable clusters: macro regime, liquidity/conditions, histories, portfolio drift, ETF/prices, loops/framework, and data health. Each tool appears to earn its place, so the count is slightly high but not bloated.

Completeness4/5

The surface is comprehensive for a read-and-analyze macro/portfolio server: current reads, historical timeseries, data freshness, event calendar, ETF look-through, drift scoring, and loop navigation are all covered. Minor gaps exist—no direct portfolio/position listing tool and non-US central-bank event dates are intentionally not tracked—but these are acknowledged and workable.

Resources

Need Help?