Skip to main content
Glama

Dated catalysts, windowed

catalysts
Read-only

FREE. Dated, falsifiable events named on the board, optionally limited to those due within N days. Past-due events are excluded when a window is given. Upstream briefs land on about 71% of days; board content is same-day roughly half the time and is never more than three days old. Not real-time. Every payload carries stale / stale_days / built_from_brief_date — read them. Commentary on public statements, not advice. This tool does not accept portfolio, position or risk-profile inputs and will refuse them with HTTP 400.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
windowNoLook-ahead window in days; omit for all catalysts
paymentNoOptional x402 payment payload: the value you would send in the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header (base64 JSON, x402 v2). Call without it first: the tool answers with the 402 terms and carries the verbatim PAYMENT-REQUIRED header value in `x402` — hand that to an x402 client to build the payload, which settles testnet USDC on Base Sepolia — then call again with this field. The receipt (tx_hash, payer, network) comes back in `settlement`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / payment / description
      Previous value: -"Optional x402 payment payload (the value you would put in the X-PAYMENT header, base64). Call without it first: the tool answers with the machine-readable 402 terms, you settle testnet USDC on Base Sepolia, then call again with this field."New value: +"Optional x402 payment payload: the value you would send in the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header (base64 JSON, x402 v2). Call without it first: the tool answers with the 402 terms and carries the verbatim PAYMENT-REQUIRED header value in `x402` — hand that to an x402 client to build the payload, which settles testnet USDC on Base Sepolia — then call again with this field. The receipt (tx_hash, payer, network) comes back in `settlement`."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description discloses freshness characteristics (71% days, same-day half the time, max three days old), non-real-time nature, payload fields (stale, stale_days, built_from_brief_date), a disclaimer, and refusal behavior with HTTP 400. This is substantial additional transparency.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds essential behavioral details and restrictions in a logical order. Every sentence contributes value with no redundancy, making it appropriately sized and well-structured.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, behavior, limitations, and return fields. With only two optional parameters and rich schema descriptions, the description is complete for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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% and both parameters are thoroughly described in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific information, so it meets the baseline for high coverage without additional value.

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 the core function precisely: retrieving dated, falsifiable events from the board with an optional window. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on catalysts and windowing, and the title reinforces the specific scope.

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?

Provides clear context: free, not real-time, and explicitly states it rejects portfolio/position/risk-profile inputs. However, it does not name alternative tools or give explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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.