ScorpTech x402 Tools

Portfolio Metrics

portfolio_metrics

Read-onlyIdempotent

Portfolio and asset risk/return analytics from price or return series you supply: annualised return (CAGR) and volatility, Sharpe and Sortino ratios, max drawdown, historical and parametric 95% VaR, beta/alpha against a benchmark series and a correlation matrix, for each asset and the weighted (periodically rebalanced) portfolio. Up to 20 assets. POST JSON body. Price: $0.003 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: POST https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/portfolio-metrics

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": "portfolio_metrics"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`prices`	No	Price series per asset, oldest first: {"BTC":[...],"ETH":[...]} (same length)
`returns`	No	Alternatively periodic simple returns per asset as decimals (0.01 = 1%)
`weights`	No	Portfolio weights per asset (normalised; default equal)
`benchmark`	No	Name of the series to use as benchmark for beta/alpha (excluded from the portfolio unless weighted)
`riskFreePct`	No	Annual risk-free rate in percent
`periodsPerYear`	No	252 trading days, 365 crypto days, 52 weeks, 12 months

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world operation. The description adds valuable operational context that annotations do not cover: POST JSON body, a 20-asset cap, x402 USDC pricing per successful call, and an HTTPS endpoint. It does not describe error behavior or rate limits, so it stops short of full behavioral disclosure.

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 purpose and metric list are front-loaded, and the second paragraph-like sentence efficiently covers transport, pricing, and endpoint. The first sentence is dense but appropriate for a multi-metric analytics tool, with no obvious padding.

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?

For a complex calculation tool with no output schema, the description lists the computed metrics and input mode clearly enough for an agent to decide whether the tool returns the needed analytics. It also covers cost and asset limits. It could be slightly more complete by describing the response structure or whether prices and returns are mutually exclusive, but the schema helps fill most of that gap.

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 parameter names, formats, defaults, and constraints are already well documented in the structured schema. The description reinforces the price-versus-return input choice, the 20-asset limit, and the periodically rebalanced weighted portfolio concept, but adds little syntax or constraint detail beyond what the schema provides.

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?

The description clearly states the resource and operation: portfolio and asset risk/return analytics computed from supplied price or return series. It enumerates the metrics produced and the 20-asset scope, so an agent can identify the tool's function without opening the schema. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling finance tools such as technical_indicators or black_scholes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by 'from price or return series you supply' and the 20-asset limit, which gives an agent enough context to understand the expected input shape. However, the description does not state when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor does it give explicit exclusions or prerequisites beyond the input format.

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

All ScorpTech x402 Tools 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?