quantifyme

Find a Matching Strategy

find_strategy

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find an existing PROVEN strategy that matches a plain-English idea, so you can offer the user a choice — deploy the existing one, or generate a fresh custom one. Mirrors the quantifyme.ai landing experience: "Found by @ (WR/PF) — Use it / Generate fresh".

Use this when a user wants to browse for an existing strategy. A vague deploy
request does NOT need it: one_shot(prompt=...) deploys the best curated preset
or a fresh build. A community strategy is another user's code, so it deploys
only after the user has seen its author and code (get_strategy_code with the
match's community_id) and picked it. Present the match (if any) and ASK:
  • Use it          → one_shot(community_id=<match.community_id>) — deploys the
                      exact strategy they picked (no generation).
  • Generate fresh  → one_shot(prompt="<their description>") — Claude writes a
                      brand-new custom strategy for them.
If there's no match, just offer to generate fresh.

Args:
  description: the user's strategy idea in plain English (e.g. "buy EURUSD
    15min when RSI < 30, sell when RSI > 70").
  symbol: optional pair to constrain the match (EURUSD, USDJPY, GBPUSD,
    USDCHF, USDCAD, AUDUSD, NZDUSD).
  timeframe: optional granularity to constrain the match (1min/5min/15min/1h).

Returns:
  dict with:
    - match: the best existing strategy, or null. When present:
        {community_id, title, username, wr, pf, ret, n_trades, symbol,
         timeframe}. Pass community_id to one_shot to deploy it unchanged.
    - description: echoed back — pass as one_shot(prompt=...) to generate fresh.
    - suggestion: a ready-to-show sentence offering the user the choice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`symbol`	No
`timeframe`	No
`description`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedMay 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/open-world, but the description adds non-obvious behavior: a community strategy is another user's code and deploys only after the user has seen author and code via get_strategy_code, and the tool must present a match and ASK rather than act. This is real workflow/safety context beyond structured fields.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with purpose then routing rules, and every block is actionable. It is somewhat long with quoted UI copy and dual workflow bullets, but almost all of it earns its place; minor trimming possible.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description documents the return shape (match, description, suggestion) and how each field feeds the next call, and covers the no-match case. An agent has everything needed to invoke and route correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does: description is the user's plain-English idea with a concrete example, symbol is constrained to a listed set of pairs, and timeframe lists allowed granularities.

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?

States a specific verb (find) and resource (an existing PROVEN strategy) matched from a plain-English idea, and explicitly frames the outcome as a user choice between deploying or generating. It cleanly separates itself from generate_strategy and one_shot.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('user wants to browse for an existing strategy'), an explicit when-NOT ('a vague deploy request does NOT need it'), and names the alternative with exact call syntax (one_shot(prompt=...)). The two-branch deploy flow is spelled out.

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

All quantifyme tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?