Skip to main content
Glama

Tradingale-mcp

by com.tradingale
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

list_top_stocks

Read-only

A RANKED LIST OF US STOCKS, sized by you: choose how many (1-20) and an optional minimum Startingale. Use this when those two are the ONLY conditions; anything else (a round count or a minimum Martingale Score) needs search_instruments. For a fixed top 5 with no arguments, use stock_overview. Answers in formatted text. Costs 3 units of the monthly quota.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHow many to return, highest Martingale Score first. 1-20, default 10.
min_startingaleNoKeep only entries at or above this Startingale reading: how well the CURRENT price sits versus the structure, unlike the Martingale Score which ranks them. Scale 0-5: 4.3 and above reads Strong, 3.7 and above Favorable, 3 and above Moderate, below that Misaligned. Default: 0 (no filter).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / min_startingale / description
      Previous value: -"Keep only entries at or above this Startingale reading: how well the CURRENT price sits versus the structure, unlike the Martingale Score which ranks them. Scale 0-5: above 4.5 reads Strong, above 3.75 Favorable, above 3.25 Moderate, below that Misaligned. Default: 0 (no filter)."New value: +"Keep only entries at or above this Startingale reading: how well the CURRENT price sits versus the structure, unlike the Martingale Score which ranks them. Scale 0-5: 4.3 and above reads Strong, 3.7 and above Favorable, 3 and above Moderate, below that Misaligned. Default: 0 (no filter)."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"How many to return, best Martingale Score first. 1-20, default 10."New value: +"How many to return, highest Martingale Score first. 1-20, default 10."
    • changedInput schema / properties / min_startingale / description
      Previous value: -"Keep only entries at or above this Startingale reading — how well the CURRENT price sits versus the structure, unlike the Martingale Score which ranks them. Scale 0-5: above 4.5 reads Strong, above 3.75 Favorable, above 3.25 Moderate, below that Misaligned. Default: 0 (no filter)."New value: +"Keep only entries at or above this Startingale reading: how well the CURRENT price sits versus the structure, unlike the Martingale Score which ranks them. Scale 0-5: above 4.5 reads Strong, above 3.75 Favorable, above 3.25 Moderate, below that Misaligned. Default: 0 (no filter)."
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Number of results. Default: 10, Max: 20"New value: +"How many to return, best Martingale Score first. 1-20, default 10."
    • changedInput schema / properties / min_startingale / description
      Previous value: -"Minimum Startingale to include. Default: 0"New value: +"Keep only entries at or above this Startingale reading — how well the CURRENT price sits versus the structure, unlike the Martingale Score which ranks them. Scale 0-5: above 4.5 reads Strong, above 3.75 Favorable, above 3.25 Moderate, below that Misaligned. Default: 0 (no filter)."
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

readOnlyHint already covers the safety profile, and the description adds genuinely useful context beyond annotations: the output is formatted text and the call costs 3 units of the monthly quota. Ordering (highest Martingale Score first) is also surfaced, though pagination/truncation behavior at the 20-entry cap is not discussed.

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?

Three compact sentences, each carrying a distinct job (what it returns, when to use vs. alternatives, cost). The capitalized opening is slightly awkward but the routing information is front-loaded and waste-free.

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?

For a two-optional-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers selection, cost, ordering, and output format. Minor omission is what happens to scoring ties or whether the formatted text includes the score components, but nothing essential to invoking it correctly is missing.

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 both parameters are already fully documented including ranges and the 0-5 scoring bands. The description restates 'how many (1-20)' and 'optional minimum Startingale' without adding syntax or edge-case meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific resource and operation: a ranked list of US stocks ordered by Martingale Score, parameterized by count and a minimum threshold. It is clearly distinguishable from crypto/market siblings by name and content, though the odd phrase 'sized by you' adds noise rather than precision.

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 gives explicit inclusion criteria ('when those two are the ONLY conditions') and names both the correct alternative (search_instruments) for round counts or minimum Martingale Score and stock_overview for a fixed top 5 with no arguments. No inference is required.

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

All Tradingale-mcp 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