Skip to main content
Glama

Central Command

by co.supabase.rtcelwjnrbmfmrywacky

Technical Analysis Toolbox

cc.data_tools
Read-onlyIdempotent

Call cc.data_tools — Comprehensive TA computation engine: 25+ indicators (SMA, EMA, RSI, MACD, ATR, Bollinger, Stochastic, ADX, CCI, Ichimoku, VWAP, Volume Profile, Fibonacci, Pivots, etc.) on any OHLCV data. Purpose: Comprehensive TA computation engine: 25+ indicators (SMA, EMA, RSI, MACD, ATR, Bollinger, Stochastic, ADX, CCI, Ichimoku, VWAP, Volume Profile, Fibonacci, Pivots, etc.) on any OHLCV data. Behavior: READ-ONLY. Does not place orders, move funds, or mutate your exchange account. Live / near-real-time data. Auth: X-Api-Key or x402 payment proof (X-PAYMENT / __x_payment). Anonymous unauthenticated calls receive HTTP 402 with payment accepts. Cost: $0.005 USDC per successful call (x402 Base USDC pay-per-use or prepaid X-Api-Key balance). Linked Connect keys are free. This is billing, not a side effect. Rate limit: 30/min (per API key). Tier: standard. Returns: Full indicator suite output for all requested tools: computed values, signals, divergences, and crossovers at every data point. Guidelines: Compute / parse / backtest only — no live orders. Feed outputs into cc.agent_strategy with force_paper=true to paper-trade. Tags: indicators, technical-analysis, computation, rsi, macd, bollinger, ichimoku, fibonacci.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolYesParameter `symbol` (string). Required.
candlesNoProvide your own OHLCV data instead of fetching Optional.
timeframeYesParameter `timeframe` (string). Required.
indicatorsYesList of indicators to compute Required.
__x_paymentNoOptional x402 payment proof (same value as X-PAYMENT header). Use when retrying after HTTP 402 if your MCP client cannot set custom headers. Not a business parameter. Optional.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesTrue when the gateway HTTP status is 2xx.
dataNoParsed JSON body from the endpoint (shape varies by slug).
errorNoError message when ok is false.
statusYesUpstream HTTP status from x402-gateway.
billingNoOptional payment / cost metadata when present.
endpointYesCatalog slug that was invoked (e.g. funding-rates).

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds significant context: explicitly states READ-ONLY, does not place orders or mutate accounts, explains cost and rate limits, and clarifies billing is not a side effect. No contradictions.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is lengthy and contains repetition (e.g., 'Comprehensive TA computation engine' appears twice). While it is well-organized with sections, the redundant phrasing reduces conciseness. Front-loading is good, but several sentences could be streamlined.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 params, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, behavior, usage guidelines, cost, auth, and output details. It links to a sibling for paper trading. It lacks explicit error handling or response structure, but the output schema likely covers that.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing the supported indicators and explaining the __x_payment parameter usage, which goes beyond the schema. It does not detail symbol or timeframe format, but the schema already provides enough.

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 clearly states it's a comprehensive TA computation engine with 25+ indicators on any OHLCV data. It lists many indicators and explicitly distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing computation only, not live orders. The verb+resource is specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description explains that it is for compute/parse/backtest only with no live orders, and suggests feeding outputs into cc.agent_strategy for paper trading. It also notes authentication and cost. However, it does not explicitly compare to similar siblings like cc.indicator_generator, leaving some ambiguity about when to choose this tool over others.

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

All Central Command toolsInspect
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
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools serve overlapping purposes, such as multiple Coinglass data tools (cc.coinglass_data, cc.funding_rates, cc.open_interest, etc.) and multiple AI chat assistants (cc.squirrel_chat, cc.squirrel_chat_v2, cc.openclaw_chat). The distinctions are subtle, likely causing agent misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent `cc.<snake_case>` pattern, with verbs like `list_catalog`, `cc.ma_fetch`, and `cc.trade_builder`. No mixing of conventions.

Tool Count3/5

33 tools is on the high side but reasonable for a comprehensive crypto trading platform. However, significant redundancy (e.g., multiple data sources for similar indicators) suggests some could be consolidated, making the surface feel heavier than necessary.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers most aspects of crypto trading: market data, technical indicators, signals, execution, backtesting, AI analysis, and blockchain RPC. Minor gaps exist (e.g., portfolio management), but the surface is largely complete for the intended domain.

Resources