EventTrader Research (read-only)

Theme Journey Propose Fund

theme_journey_propose_fund

Read-onlyIdempotent

Propose the user's OWN fund of several trading vehicles to reduce risk: with no symbols you pick the legs (the best-ranked liquid vehicles whose daily returns are least correlated with each other); with symbols the user picked them. Inverse-volatility weights. Returns each leg (weight, size, risk tier, worst move alone), the combined fund measured on every H-day hold of the weighted index of the legs' own daily closes (σ, worst, probable net and lower bound, risk tier, time-to-target), the legs-alone comparison, risk_removed_pct, the diversification ratio, the average pair correlation, and build — the exact POST /api/v1/aib-builder/clone/create body for /create-fund. Read-only; nothing is created or charged here. Past measurement, never a promise; say correlations rise in a sell-off. (no key needed)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "theme_journey_propose_fund"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`n_legs`	No	legs when NEXUS picks (default 5)
`symbols`	No	the vehicles the user picked (tickers); omit to let NEXUS pick
`target_pct`	No	target in percent
`usdc_amount`	No	the stake (sizes every leg)
`horizon_days`	No	hold length (default 7)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only; nothing is created or charged here' and notes no key is needed. It goes further by disclosing the return payload contents and a caveat that correlations rise in a sell-off, though it does not cover rate limits or latency.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, but the single dense paragraph packs a long enumeration of return fields that is hard to scan. Every clause is relevant, yet the wall-of-text structure hurts readability.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the full burden of explaining return values and does so thoroughly (per-leg metrics, combined fund stats, risk_removed_pct, diversification ratio, and the `build` POST body). An agent has enough to call it and interpret results.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: `symbols` toggles who picks the legs, `n_legs` applies only when NEXUS picks, and `usdc_amount` 'sizes every leg'. `target_pct` and `horizon_days` are left to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Propose the user's OWN fund of several trading vehicles to reduce risk') and immediately distinguishes the two modes (NEXUS-picked legs vs user-supplied `symbols`), which separates it from siblings like theme_journey_basket and theme_journey_backtest.

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?

Clearly explains the two invocation modes and their conditions ('with no `symbols` you pick the legs' vs 'with `symbols` the user picked them'), plus the read-only framing. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative to use instead, so it stops 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 EventTrader Research (read-only) 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?