Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Ava Advisor

by fund.ava
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Options Scan

options_scan
Read-only

Find STOCKS by an options-behaviour pattern (opana lens) across the ~557 US optionable names — returns ranked UNDERLYINGS each with a plain-language because + metrics (value, and prev→delta for a trend/flip). STOCK scanner only: it does NOT pick option contracts/strikes/expiries (for one named stock's detail use options_sentiment). The pattern is a key OR plain English (the server resolves it) — its temporal_mode decides the read (level = now, rising/falling = ~2-week trend, flip = reversal). A supported:'no'/'future' pattern returns an empty list + an honest note (say so, don't substitute). US-capped — state that in the answer.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "pattern": "<pattern>"
    },
    "name": "options_scan"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax rows (default 20, hard cap 50). Keep SMALL + narrow the scope; page/refine rather than dump — heavily-covered assets have hundreds of articles.
horizonNo`short` | `long` — which options horizon to read (default long = the positioning/conviction lens; short = the gamma/near-term lens).long
patternYesAn options-behaviour pattern — an exact key OR plain English ('cheap implied vol', 'crowd getting fearful', 'smart money piling in'); the server resolves it. CSV = AND-combine (intersect), e.g. 'iv_cheap,smart money buying'; the FIRST token owns the ranking. 🔴 ENGLISH.
min_strengthNoOptional cutoff on the ranked axis / Δ — omit to let the scanner return the top-ranked names.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, it discloses the return shape (ranked underlyings with a plain-language `because` and `metrics` showing value and prev→delta), the empty-list-plus-note behavior for `supported:'no'`/`'future'` patterns, and the US-only scope that must be stated in answers. These are exactly the operational quirks an agent needs and none are in the annotations.

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 (what it scans, then what it is not, then output behavior) and dense with useful detail. Some text restates the `pattern` schema description (key OR plain English, CSV AND-combine), which is mild redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description does a good job explaining the return payload and the degenerate empty-result case. Minor gaps remain: paging/refinement behavior and how `horizon` alters results are left to the schema, though the schema does cover them.

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 a baseline of 3 applies, but the description adds genuine meaning: the `pattern`'s `temporal_mode` determines the read (level = now, rising/falling = ~2-week trend, flip = reversal) and English is resolved server-side. It does not add much on `limit` or `min_strength` beyond the schema.

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 opens with a concrete verb+resource ('Find STOCKS by an options-behaviour pattern') and scopes it to 'the ~557 US optionable names'. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling `options_sentiment` by stating it is a STOCK scanner that does not pick contracts/strikes/expiries.

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 exclusions ('STOCK scanner only: it does NOT pick option contracts/strikes/expiries') and names the correct alternative with its condition ('for one named stock's detail use `options_sentiment`'). It also tells the agent what to do when a pattern is unsupported: return empty plus a note, don't substitute.

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

All Ava Advisor 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