Skip to main content
Glama

show_report_card

Read-only

Show a QuanterLab report as a card in the chat: the question, the one-sentence answer against holding the same asset, up to four figures and a growth-of-$1 chart (for a stochastic run with a parameter grid, the grid of each setting's Sharpe with the best one outlined, its cells in grid), a button to open the full report, and the card's next steps as choices a tap puts in the chat, with one to change a setting (on a lab run, the choices open the project in the lab, where the change is made). It is for a report with no card in the chat yet: the link summarize_workflow or save_workflow_result answered with (a backtest, walk-forward, stochastic backtest, regime analysis or optimization, scan or lab run), or a report link the person pastes. A run started in this chat shows its result in its own card, so the report_url a start or its progress tool answered with needs no second card. One call shows the card, and the card offers the report's next steps as choices.

    Args:
        report_url: the link summarize_workflow or save_workflow_result answered with
            (https://quanterlab.com/r/..., /report/..., /backtest-report/... or /filter-report/...), or a
            report link the person pastes.
    

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
report_urlYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly and non-destructive annotations, the description explains exactly what the card contains, how parameter-grid results are represented, and that the card offers next-step choices that can open the lab project. It also clarifies that one call produces the card without a follow-up call.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded, but the first sentence is extremely long and heavily nested with parentheticals, making it harder to parse than necessary. The later sentence about one call showing the card repeats information already implied in the first sentence.

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?

For a one-parameter UI tool with no output schema, the description is complete enough: it explains what appears in chat, what the parameter accepts, and when the card should or should not be shown. No critical agent-facing behavior appears missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden for report_url. It does so well by identifying the source tools and accepted URL patterns, including /r/, /report/, /backtest-report/, and /filter-report/ links or a pasted report link.

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: showing a QuanterLab report as a chat card. It also differentiates from sibling behavior by saying this is for reports with no existing card, while runs started in the chat already show their own card.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly names when to use the tool: a report link answered by summarize_workflow or save_workflow_result, or a pasted report link, and when not to use it: when a run was started in the chat and already has its own result card. This directly routes the agent away from redundant calls.

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.

Resources