Skip to main content
Glama

Backtest360

by com.backtest360

list_templates

List predesigned strategy templates, or fetch one in full.

    Cheap, cacheable per session. The engine returns the templates
    available to the calling key.

    With no arguments: a compact catalog — ``{"templates": [...],
    "count": N}`` — where each entry carries id, origin, name, and
    description. Use it to discover what exists. Pass name='sma-cross'
    (id or name, case-insensitive) to get that single template's complete
    entry: its strategy logic (``condition_tree`` + ``indicators``, the
    same shape validate_strategy and run_backtest accept) plus parameter
    metadata — ``defaults`` (starting parameter values), ``requires``,
    and ``locked_params`` (parameters that must keep their template
    values). Pass compact=False for complete entries for everything
    (large; the MCP server may cap it and set ``truncated_by_mcp`` —
    prefer compact or name=).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
compactNo

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description covers key behavioral aspects: it is 'cheap, cacheable per session', returns templates 'available to the calling key', describes return formats for both modes, and notes potential truncation for non-compact output.

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?

The description is well-structured with paragraph breaks and front-loads the purpose. It is fairly concise at ~150 words, with each sentence adding value, though it could be slightly more terse.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool has only 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete. It covers both functional modes, parameter behavior, return format, edge cases (truncation), and relates to sibling tools.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description provides all meaning: explains name accepts id or name (case-insensitive) to fetch a single template, and compact controls output verbosity. It also details the structure of returned entries and references sibling tool schemas (validate_strategy, run_backtest).

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 the tool's dual purpose: listing predesigned strategy templates in a compact catalog or fetching one in full by name. It distinguishes between the two modes of operation and contrasts with sibling tools like get_catalog or get_strategy_schema.

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 provides clear context for when to use each mode: 'Use it to discover what exists' for the catalog mode, and 'Pass name='sma-cross' ... to get that single template's complete entry'. It also warns about the large size of compact=False. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives.

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

All Backtest360 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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct operation or resource: backtesting, comparison, macro data, reference catalogs, etc. Even similar tools like run_backtest and compare_backtests are clearly differentiated by purpose and inputs.

Naming Consistency4/5

Overall consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, with a few exceptions like engine_info (noun_noun) and export_backtest (verb_noun but less common verb). The pattern is predictable and aids agent selection.

Tool Count4/5

20 tools is slightly above the ideal range but justified by the breadth of the platform (backtesting, data retrieval, reference, export). Each tool serves a clear purpose without redundancy.

Completeness4/5

Covers the full backtesting lifecycle: strategy validation, data sourcing, backtesting, comparison, export, and reference lookups. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no explicit strategy persistence), but the core workflow is complete.

Resources