get_vault_watchReturns COMEX warehouse inventory: registered, eligible, combined ounces, daily changes, open interest, oversubscribed ratio
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| metal | No | Optional metal filter; returns all 4 if omitted |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It lists output fields but omits any behavioral traits such as data freshness, access constraints, rate limits, or whether this is a read-only operation.
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?
Single well-structured sentence that packs all key output fields without redundancy. Every word earns its place.
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?
For a simple one-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description lists all returned fields and includes units (ounces). It is sufficiently complete, though it could mention data source or frequency if relevant.
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?
The input schema fully documents the only parameter (metal) with an enum and description. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, but since schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
Clearly states the tool returns COMEX warehouse inventory and enumerates specific data points (registered, eligible, combined ounces, daily changes, open interest, oversubscribed ratio). This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from sibling data tools.
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?
Implies usage when COMEX inventory data is needed, but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparisons with sibling tools. No exclusions or alternatives mentioned.
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.
Most tools target distinct resources and actions (portfolio, spot prices, history, COMEX vault, coin melt, receipts). However, get_portfolio and get_analytics both report cost basis and P/L, and get_daily_brief and get_stack_signal both provide market commentary, creating mild ambiguity.
All tools follow a clear verb_noun snake_case pattern, with nine get_* prefixed tools and three distinct action verbs (add_, chat_, scan_). Naming is consistent and predictable.
12 tools is well-scoped for a precious metals platform covering portfolio management, market data, and specialized calculations. Each tool serves a distinct function within that domain.
The server supports adding and reading holdings but lacks update/delete operations for holdings, creating a dead end for correcting or removing entries. Market data coverage is thorough, but portfolio lifecycle management is incomplete.