Hesper Atlas Evidence

Forward changes since a publication (subscription)

get_changes_since

Read-onlyIdempotent

Chronological before/after events after a stable forward-publication cursor. By default returns only stance, target-size and actionable risk changes; set material_only=false to include mark and score updates. Supports one-symbol filtering and pagination. Requires an active subscription. Completed end-of-day data, not real-time or investment advice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Events to return, default 100, max 200.
`offset`	No	Events to skip, default 0.
`symbol`	No	Ticker symbol, e.g. NVDA. Case-insensitive.
`material_only`	No	Default true; false also returns non-material mark updates.
`since_publication_id`	Yes	Exclusive stable hsp_pub_... cursor.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`as_of`	No
`source`	No
`caveats`	No
`is_live`	No
`citation`	No
`data_type`	No
`disclaimer`	Yes
`provenance`	No
`source_url`	No
`last_updated`	No
`calculation_version`	No
`methodology_version`	No

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds valuable behavioral context: default returns only stance, target-size and actionable risk changes; material_only=false includes mark and score updates; data is completed end-of-day, not real-time; and an active subscription is required. This goes well beyond the structured annotations.

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?

Three sentences with no filler; the main purpose is front-loaded and each sentence earns its place by adding scope, options, or prerequisites.

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 an output schema present and safety annotations already covering read-only/idempotent behavior, the description covers the essential call context: cursor semantics, default filtering, the toggle for broader results, one-symbol filtering, pagination, subscription prerequisite, and data freshness caveat.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the material_only default behavior and how to widen results, and it references symbol filtering and pagination in plain language, providing value beyond 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: chronological before/after events after a stable forward-publication cursor. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by emphasizing the publication-cursor mechanism and the default material-only scope, making it clear this is not a general get_* tool.

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 gives clear context: use this after a stable forward-publication cursor, with an active subscription, and it supports symbol filtering and pagination. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use it, so an agent must partly infer how it differs from siblings.

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

All Hesper Atlas Evidence tools Inspect

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

A4/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

The five historical-performance tools (get_track_record, get_walk_forward_evidence, get_heldout_evidence, get_ledger_stats, list_closed_trades) occupy heavily overlapping territory, and an agent could easily grab the wrong evidence artifact. The detailed 'use when' openers help considerably, but the boundaries between replay, walk-forward, and validation are subtle enough that misselection risk remains real.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools follow a clean snake_case verb_noun pattern, with get_ reserved for single artifacts/reports and list_ for enumerable collections. The convention is slightly loose—get_changes_since and get_ledger_stats are more list-like than get_-like, and the verbs don't always signal collection size—but overall the pattern is predictable and readable.

Tool Count4/5

At 15 tools, the server sits at the upper boundary of a well-scoped surface, and each tool does earn its place in the evidence ecosystem (current signal, lists, portfolio, context, diffs, publications, replay, validation, methodology, provenance). It is slightly heavy and could feel daunting, but nothing is redundant.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the evidence domain thoroughly: current state, forward publication history, performance replays, two distinct validation artifacts, methodology, and hash-level provenance. Minor gaps exist—there is no tool to enumerate the full covered universe or search across tickers, forcing users to arrive with a symbol in mind—but core workflows have no dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?