Skip to main content
Glama

AurelianFlo

by com.aurelianflo

Compliance Exposure Forecast

compliance_exposure_forecast
Read-only

Forecast future OFAC wallet exposure for a wallet set using stored OFAC snapshot diffs when available, listedOn backfill when honest, or an explicit caller prior; returns current exact-match baseline, metadata-weighted per-wallet risk, and report-shaped output. Use this when current screening is not enough; use wallet_ofac_batch for current hit status only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assetNoOptional asset or network ticker filter such as ETH, USDC, XBT, TRX, ARB, or BSC.
titleNoOptional report title.
priorsNoExplicit prior assumptions used only when overriding OFAC history cadence.
targetNoTarget event for the forecast probability.
addressesYesWallet addresses to forecast for future OFAC exact-match exposure.
iterationsNoForecast trial count.
horizon_daysNoForecast horizon in days.
tier_weightsNoRelationship tier weight overrides.
summary_focusNoOptional summary emphasis or focus area.
address_metadataNoOptional per-address business metadata used to weight exposure hazard.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoPrimary structured result payload for the tool.
errorNoMachine-readable error code or message when the tool fails.
outputNoNested renderer output when a workflow bundles an artifact render.
reportNoReport-shaped payload when available; null for status-only retrieval responses.
sourceNoSource label, route, dataset, or execution metadata for the result.
messageNoHuman-readable error or status message.
successNoWhether the tool completed successfully.
artifactNoInline generated file artifact. The service does not persist a hosted download URL.
artifactsNoArtifact rendering hints keyed by format.
artifact_summaryNoDelivery and rendering metadata for an inline generated artifact.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds context about data sources (OFAC snapshot diffs, backfill, explicit priors) and output structure (baseline, risk, report), which is useful beyond the annotation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two concise sentences cover purpose, behavior, and usage guidance. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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 complexity (10 params, output schema), description covers key output types and usage. Could elaborate on data source terms, but domain knowledge is assumed. Adequate overall.

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 coverage is 100% with thorough descriptions for all parameters. The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning, only hinting at metadata-weighted risk. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states it forecasts future OFAC wallet exposure, using specific verbs and resources, and distinguishes from sibling tool wallet_ofac_batch by noting its focus on current hit status.

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?

Explicitly advises when to use this tool ('when current screening is not enough') and when not (for current hits, use wallet_ofac_batch). Also mentions different data source strategies.

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

All AurelianFlo 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
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are generally distinct, with clear differentiators like single vs batch vs report output. The queue_saved_list and report_saved_retrieve could be confused but descriptions clarify their separate domains.

Naming Consistency4/5

Prefixes like compliance_, wallet_ofac_, report_, queue_ provide consistency within subdomains, though verb order varies (e.g., report_docx_generate vs queue_saved_list).

Tool Count4/5

11 tools are appropriate for a compliance server covering screening, reporting, and optimization. Slightly on the higher side but each tool serves a unique purpose.

Completeness4/5

Covers core workflows: screening, batch, reporting, EDD memos, exposure forecasting, queue optimization, and status checks. Minor gaps like no wallet set management, but overall comprehensive.

Resources