YourAITools MCP Hub

TASignal: Technical analysis read

ta_bias

Read-onlyIdempotent

Descriptive technical read for a crypto asset on closed 15m/1h/4h/1d candles: bias (strong bearish ... strong bullish), trend (up/down/mixed) and regime (trending/ranging) from RSI, MACD, EMA 20/50/200, Bollinger and ADX. Free preview tier. The paid x402 routes add every indicator value and the bias components (/v1/lite), VaR/CVaR, drawdowns and ATR position sizing (/v1/risk) and rule backtests (/v1/backtest). Read-only analytics; not financial advice.

[TASignal via YourAITools MCP Hub] Free tier: same as TASignal's own MCP server (call without payment and without tier). Paid: lite $0.005 per call, with a credits key (Authorization: Bearer yatc_...) or x402 (USDC; the hub returns the payment terms). Failed tool calls aren't charged: credits are refunded automatically and x402 payments only settle on success.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "symbol": "<symbol>"
    },
    "name": "ta_bias"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tier`	No	Paid tier: lite $0.005. Omit tier (with no credits key or x402 payment) to use the free tier.
`symbol`	Yes	Base asset ticker, e.g. BTC, ETH, SOL, HYPE (BTC-PERP, ETH-USD and SOLUSDT are accepted too)
`timeframe`	No	Candle timeframe: 15m, 1h, 4h or 1d (default 1h; risk default 4h)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 30, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / symbol / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  "ETH"
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / timeframe / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  "4h"
+]
```
First observedOct 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, and the description adds real value beyond them: candles are 'closed' (no partial-bar look-ahead), it is a free preview tier, pricing is $0.005 via credits key or x402, and failed calls are refunded / only settle on success. It omits response shape and rate limits, keeping it below 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 what is computed before pricing and payment mechanics, and every sentence carries information. The hub/payment boilerplate is lengthy but relevant to correct invocation, so it earns most of its space.

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 no output schema, the description carries the burden and does name the returned signals (bias scale, trend, regime) and their indicator inputs. It could say more about response shape or how bias is scored, but an agent has enough to call it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so symbol formats, tier enum and timeframe defaults are already documented in the schema. The description only reinforces the timeframe set ('closed 15m/1h/4h/1d candles') and the omit-tier-for-free behavior, both of which the schema already states, so baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource: a 'descriptive technical read for a crypto asset' returning bias, trend and regime from named indicators on closed candles. That distinguishes it from the indicator-scanning siblings, though it never names ta_risk or ta_backtest directly, so the agent must infer the /v1/risk to ta_risk mapping itself.

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 sets clear context for when this is the right call (directional bias on closed candles) and explains which additional analytics live behind the paid routes, effectively routing the agent to /v1/risk or /v1/backtest when VaR or backtests are needed. No explicit exclusion or named alternative tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All YourAITools MCP Hub tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?