PropPassCheck

Track a live challenge or funded account

track_account

Read-only

For a trader on a live account: from the trade history since the account started, how far the balance is above the maximum-loss floor (static or trailing), what is left of today's daily loss limit and the balance to stop at, progress to the profit target or a payout, the consistency rule and the day counts, with a status. Every trade needs a YYYY-MM-DD close date. Closed trades only: open trades also count at most firms, and the firm's own dashboard is what counts.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "trades": "<trades>",
      "starting_balance": "<starting_balance>",
      "challenge_id": "<challenge_id>"
    },
    "name": "track_account"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`stage`	No	Which stage the account is in. Default phase1.
`today`	No	The trader's own date, YYYY-MM-DD, so "today" matches their day. Default: today in UTC.
`trades`	Yes	Closed trades in the order they closed.
`start_date`	No	YYYY-MM-DD the account (or this stage) started. Default: the first trade's date.
`challenge_id`	Yes	The PropPassCheck id of the account being traded.
`starting_balance`	Yes	The account's starting balance, for example 100000.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds useful computational context: it derives metrics from trade history, requires close dates, restricts input to closed trades, and warns that the firm's own dashboard is authoritative. It stops short of describing response structure or status values.

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?

It is front-loaded and reasonably compact for a six-parameter financial calculator, and the closing caveats are useful. The first sentence is dense and lists many outputs in a run-on way, but no sentence is extraneous.

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?

Without an output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining returns, and it enumerates the key metrics plus a status, along with data constraints and an authoritative-source caveat. It does not define status values or a response shape, but it is otherwise complete for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters. The description adds that trades should be closed and tied to the account start, but its statement 'Every trade needs a YYYY-MM-DD close date' conflicts with the schema's 'Give it for every trade or for none,' creating ambiguity rather than clarification.

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 opens with 'For a trader on a live account' and states it computes drawdown floor, daily loss limit, profit target progress, consistency, and day counts from trade history. That is a specific operation on a distinct resource, though it does not name or contrast with any sibling 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?

It gives clear context: use it for a live account, supply closed trades, and note that open trades may count at some firms while the firm's dashboard is authoritative. It does not explicitly say when to choose this over get_challenge or other siblings, nor when not to use it.

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

All PropPassCheck 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?