list_open_calls
List sealed forecasts whose window has NOT yet resolved — predictions on the public record that haven't happened yet (anteriority you can watch).
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
JYOTINT Sealed Forecasts
TDQS
B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It describes what is listed (sealed forecasts not yet resolved) but fails to disclose factors like authentication, pagination, or result format. The poetic phrasing adds no actionable behavioral insight.
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 a single sentence, which is concise. However, it includes a somewhat verbose parenthetical explanation ('anteriority you can watch') that could be simplified. It front-loads the key action and resource.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides a basic understanding of the result set. However, it omits important context like whether results are paginated, how to interpret 'window has NOT yet resolved', and whether there are any access restrictions. It is minimally adequate but has gaps.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to add meaning beyond the schema since there are no parameters to document. The baseline score of 4 is appropriate.
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 that the tool lists sealed forecasts whose window hasn't resolved, using specific terms like 'sealed forecasts' and 'window has NOT yet resolved'. It effectively conveys the core purpose, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'search_sealed_forecasts'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The description assumes the agent will infer the usage context without explicit direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes (fetch one forecast vs. list open calls vs. search), but neural_search and search_sealed_forecasts both retrieve from the same corpus, and ask_the_record overlaps slightly with neural_search for site-copy questions. Descriptions mitigate ambiguity, but a few boundaries require careful reading.
Naming Consistency4/5
The dominant pattern is get_<noun> (get_advisory, get_map, get_luck_test), with list_open_calls, search_sealed_forecasts, ask_the_record, and neural_search as deviations. All names are lowercase snake_case and readable, but the verb prefixes are not perfectly uniform.
Tool Count5/5
With 13 tools, the server is well-scoped for a specialized sealed-forecast corpus. Each tool addresses a distinct analytical or retrieval need, and the count fits comfortably in the ideal range without feeling bloated or thin.
Completeness5/5
The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of interacting with the corpus: search, retrieve, list, inspect stats, verify integrity, regrade, visualize, and ask questions. The append-only nature means no update/delete tools are needed, so the set is complete for its stated purpose.