Sentinel Aleph

Update strategy

update_strategy

Idempotent

Changes fields of one of your saved strategies and returns the updated strategy. Use it to adjust a strategy between run_backtest runs; to make a new one use create_strategy. Only the fields you pass change; engines and symbols replace the whole list. The same tier rules as create_strategy apply to the result. A bot already deployed from the strategy keeps its own copy and is not changed. Needs an API key with write scope; another account's id reads as not found.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	No	Engine family the setup trades on.
`name`	No	Setup name, up to 100 characters.
`engines`	No	Engines to combine; the tier caps how many (Free 3, Gold 5, Platinum 8, Aleph 12).
`symbols`	No	Pairs; the tier caps how many (Free and Gold 1, Platinum 3, Aleph 10). Empty means any pair, and run_backtest then needs symbol.
`direction`	No	Which signals the setup takes.
`timeframe`	No	Candle timeframe; the tier decides which are open (Free 1h/4h, Gold 15m/1h/4h).
`description`	No	Free text, up to 1000 characters.
`strategy_id`	Yes	Id from get_my_strategies.
`min_confidence`	No	Minimum signal confidence, percent (1–100).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Set only on a failed call (isError true): what went wrong.
`created`	No	True when create_strategy saved it.
`updated`	No	True when update_strategy saved it.
`strategy`	No	One saved strategy.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 28, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / engines / description

Previous value: -"Engines to combine; the tier caps how many (Gold 5, Platinum 8, Aleph 12)."New value: +"Engines to combine; the tier caps how many (Free 3, Gold 5, Platinum 8, Aleph 12)."

changedInput schema / properties / symbols / description

Previous value: -"Pairs; the tier caps how many (Gold 1, Platinum 3, Aleph 10). Empty means any pair, and run_backtest then needs symbol."New value: +"Pairs; the tier caps how many (Free and Gold 1, Platinum 3, Aleph 10). Empty means any pair, and run_backtest then needs symbol."

changedInput schema / properties / timeframe / description

Previous value: -"Candle timeframe; the tier decides which are open (Gold 15m/1h/4h)."New value: +"Candle timeframe; the tier decides which are open (Free 1h/4h, Gold 15m/1h/4h)."

AddedSep 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: discloses patch semantics (only passed fields change), list-replacement behavior for engines/symbols, that tier rules re-apply, that deployed bots keep an independent copy, that write scope is required, and that cross-account ids return not-found. This is exactly the side-effect and auth context annotations cannot carry.

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?

Front-loads what the tool does, then usage routing, then mutation semantics, then caveats. Five sentences, each carrying distinct non-redundant information; nothing could be cut without losing an agent-relevant fact.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description still confirms the updated strategy is returned. Auth requirements, error behavior, mutation scope, and bot-isolation side effects are all covered for a 9-parameter mutation tool.

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 genuine meaning beyond the schema by explaining that unpassed fields are untouched and that engines/symbols are whole-list replacements rather than merges. That patch-vs-replace distinction is not derivable from the schema alone.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Changes fields of one of your saved strategies') and immediately distinguishes it from create_strategy. An agent can tell it apart from create_strategy and delete_strategy without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('adjust a strategy between run_backtest runs') and names the alternative for the other case ('to make a new one use create_strategy'). The when/when-not routing is fully specified.

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

All Sentinel Aleph 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?