Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

LuxAlgo MCP

by io.github.LuxAlgo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Alert history

alerts_history
Read-only

When the signed-in member's alerts fired, newest first (kept 90 days): the alert, the market, the time, and whether each notification was delivered; the price it fired at only for crypto markets fed by an exchange's public feed (Hyperliquid, Binance). Optionally for one alert (alert_id). Paged with cursor. Use alerts_list for the alerts themselves. Requires signing in with a LuxAlgo account (OAuth).

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": {
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "alerts_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
cursorNo`next_cursor` from the previous page; keep the other arguments identical.
contextYesExplain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as "a user", "the customer", or "an account". Example: "Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution."
alert_idNoThe alert's id, from alerts_list or the result that created it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive, open-world, so the description's added value is in the operational details it supplies: 90-day retention, newest-first ordering, cursor paging, and the caveat that a fired price exists only for crypto markets fed by an exchange's public feed (Hyperliquid, Binance). That caveat prevents a wrong inference about missing price data. It does not discuss rate limits or result sizes beyond the schema limit, so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with scope and ordering, then alternatives, then auth. Dense but each clause carries distinct operational information; the crypto-market price caveat is the one parenthetical that could be tightened.

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 compensates by enumerating returned fields (alert, market, time, delivery status, price) and their conditional availability. Combined with retention and paging behavior, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret results.

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?

With 75% schema coverage, the baseline is 3; the description earns a 4 by explaining that cursor is a paging token and that alert_id narrows results to a single alert. limit is left to the schema, which documents it adequately with default and bounds.

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?

States a precise verb and resource — when the signed-in member's alerts fired — plus ordering (newest first), retention (90 days), and an explicit contrast with alerts_list. An agent can distinguish it from alerts_list without opening a schema.

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?

Names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it ('Use alerts_list for the alerts themselves'), notes the optional single-alert narrowing via alert_id, and states the OAuth prerequisite. When-to-use and when-not are both covered.

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

All LuxAlgo 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