factorguide

factorguide_diagnose

Quick single-pair diagnostic. IC with risk prediction for both model classes. Include variances for sign detectability. Requires X-Wallet header with your EVM wallet address (0x...). First 5 queries are free trial.

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": {
      "i": "<i>",
      "j": "<j>",
      "coupling_value": "<coupling_value>",
      "sample_size": "<sample_size>"
    },
    "name": "factorguide_diagnose"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`i`	Yes	First variable name
`j`	Yes	Second variable name
`variance_i`	No
`variance_j`	No
`sample_size`	Yes
`coupling_value`	Yes	IC or coupling value

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedApr 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden and it does disclose important behavioral constraints: it requires an X-Wallet header with EVM address and notes a 5-query free trial. It also hints at output content ('IC with risk prediction', 'variances for sign detectability'). It does not explicitly state read-only safety, but the diagnostic nature implies a non-mutating operation.

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?

The description is brief and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the sentence 'Include variances for sign detectability' is awkwardly phrased and could be misread as an instruction rather than a description of behavior, slightly detracting from clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description gives the purpose, authentication requirement, and a hint of outputs, but it lacks details on return structure (no output schema), omits any mention of sample_size, and does not clarify how it differs from sibling diagnostic tools. It is adequate for a simple quick diagnostic but leaves notable gaps for full autonomous use.

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?

The schema covers 50% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds some context for variance parameters ('variances for sign detectability') and clarifies that the tool deals with IC, but it does not explain sample_size or the exact role of coupling_value beyond what the schema says. Thus it partially compensates for the schema gaps but not fully.

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 clearly identifies the tool as a 'Quick single-pair diagnostic' that computes IC with risk prediction for both model classes, distinguishing it as a focused diagnostic for a single variable pair. It is more specific than a mere restatement, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools for comparison.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'Quick single-pair diagnostic' implies its use for quick, focused pair analysis, and the 'first 5 queries are free trial' gives a usage restriction. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over tools like factorguide_synergy_detect or factorguide_regime_detect, nor does it provide exclusions.

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

All factorguide 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.