Manawa Terminal

Tag activity with a strategy

tag_activity

Mark one action as belonging to a strategy already on this account.

Call list_strategies first and pass that id. The playbook stays read-only.
This only writes the activity tag. kind is decision, tool_call, order,
alert_set, library_save, screener_run, or query. tool is mcp, portfolios,
alerts, library, journal, screeners, watchlists, or chat.

Args:
    strategy_id: Strategy UUID from list_strategies
    title: What was done, in one short line
    kind: The activity kind. Default tool_call
    tickers: Symbols involved, if any
    tool: Which desk the action belongs to. Default mcp

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`kind`	No	tool_call
`tool`	No	mcp
`title`	Yes
`tickers`	No
`strategy_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds real value by clarifying that the operation only appends a tag and leaves the strategy playbook untouched. It does not cover failure modes (e.g. invalid strategy_id) or whether repeat tagging is idempotent, so it falls short of 5.

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 the core action, then prerequisite, then a structured Args block. Slight redundancy between the title and the first sentence, and the enum lists are run together in prose rather than as a compact list, but nothing is wasted.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies the missing prerequisite, scope, and enum semantics. It would be complete with a note on what happens when strategy_id is invalid or when the same activity is tagged twice.

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% and the schema declares no enums, yet the description documents all five parameters: strategy_id's source, title's expected brevity, kind's full value set plus default, tickers, and tool's value set plus default. This is exactly the compensation the low coverage requires.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Mark one action as belonging to a strategy already on this account.' It also scopes the write ('This only writes the activity tag'), which cleanly separates it from siblings like get_strategy, list_strategies, and submit_journal_draft.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives an explicit prerequisite and ordering: 'Call list_strategies first and pass that id.' It also states a boundary ('The playbook stays read-only'), telling the agent what this does not touch. No alternative tool is named, but there is no competing sibling for this operation.

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

All Manawa Terminal 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?