Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SpreadBench NCSX-IS — AI Infrastructure Bond Issuance Spread Index

by com.spreadbench
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

ncsx_wall

Read-onlyIdempotent

Maturity wall for AI-infrastructure bonds: outstanding face value by maturity year, split secured / unsecured, with the full bond list per year. As of 2026-11-04, $17.86B (63.6% of the index) matures in 2031, and 7 of those 8 bonds priced within 2026 — a single issuance window produced a same-maturity wall. Pass year (e.g. 2030) to get just that year: its face value, share of the index, secured/unsecured split and every bond maturing in it. Use for refinancing-concentration and supply-schedule questions. Terms and maturity dates are facts from SEC filings; this is not a refinancing forecast or credit judgement.

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": "ncsx_wall"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearNoOptional 4-digit maturity year to drill into, e.g. "2030" or "2031". Omit for all years plus the peak-year breakdown.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds genuinely new context: data vintage ('As of 2026-11-04'), provenance ('facts from SEC filings'), default return shape, and an explicit scope boundary ('not a refinancing forecast or credit judgement'). An agent knows both how to call it and how far to trust the numbers.

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 with what the tool returns, then the drill-down behavior, then the usage guidance and disclaimer — a sensible order with no filler sentences. The illustrative 2031 statistics are longer than strictly necessary but earn their place by teaching the agent what a maturity wall looks like in the output.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of describing return values, and it does: face value, share of index, secured/unsecured split, and the full bond list per year, plus the peak-year breakdown in the default mode. For a one-optional-parameter read tool, nothing an agent needs is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the schema by spelling out the consequence of omitting year (all years plus the peak-year breakdown) versus supplying one (that year's face value, index share, split and bond list). It adds output meaning rather than parameter syntax.

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 names a specific resource and breakdown: outstanding face value by maturity year, split secured/unsecured, with the bond list per year. That is distinguishable from siblings like ncsx_constituents or ncsx_curve without opening a schema, and the sample figures make the 'wall' concept concrete.

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 states the use case directly ('Use for refinancing-concentration and supply-schedule questions') and explains the two modes: omit year for all years plus the peak-year breakdown, or pass a year like 2030 to drill in. It does not name a sibling alternative or say when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All SpreadBench NCSX-IS — AI Infrastructure Bond Issuance Spread Index toolsInspect
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