Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

LuxAlgo MCP

by io.github.LuxAlgo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List prop firms and challenges

propfirms_list_simulatable
Read-only

List the prop firms in the live LuxAlgo directory together with every simulatable challenge (challengeId, display name, account size, currency, price, and its rule-semantics provenance). Call this first to discover the firmId + challengeId pairs accepted by propfirms_challenge_rules, propfirms_simulate, propfirms_optimal_risk, propfirms_compare and propfirms_simulate_trades. Challenges whose loss-rule semantics cannot be established are listed under notSimulatable instead of being guessed. The listing is data, not endorsement: firms are alphabetical - no recommendation or ranking is implied, and none should be presented. DATA SOURCE & PROVENANCE: firm data comes live from LuxAlgo's public, keyless prop-firm directory API - the data behind luxalgo.com/prop-firms. Rule semantics are used verbatim where the directory serves structured rule columns; where it serves only free text, semantics are inferred ONLY when one reasonable reading exists, and every inferred field is disclosed in inferredFields (provenance 'directory+inferred') - relay those to the user next to any numbers. Challenges whose loss rules cannot be established are refused as not simulatable rather than guessed. Firms change rules; each firm's own page is always authoritative. NOTE: this lists only the firms and challenges whose rules the engine can encode honestly. The full directory — every visible firm with platforms, prices, payout terms, and live offers/promo codes — is served by propfirms_search, propfirms_search_challenges, and propfirms_search_offers.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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."
productTypeNoOptional filter to one instrument class. Omit to list every firm.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • changedInput schema / properties / context / description
      Previous value: -"Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\""New value: +"Explain 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.\""
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\"",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "context"
+]
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint/destructiveHint; the description goes far beyond by disclosing the live keyless external data source, that inferred rule semantics are flagged in `inferredFields` with provenance 'directory+inferred', that unencodable challenges are refused into `notSimulatable` rather than guessed, and that the listing is explicitly non-endorsing and unranked.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The scope and provenance lead are front-loaded and valuable, but the text is very long and repeats itself: 'Challenges whose loss-rule semantics cannot be established are listed under notSimulatable' is restated almost verbatim later as 'Challenges whose loss rules cannot be established are refused as not simulatable rather than guessed.' The provenance rule is likewise stated twice, diluting an otherwise useful definition.

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 correctly compensates by naming the returned fields (challengeId, display name, account size, currency, price, provenance) and the notSimulatable branch. It omits any mention of the required `context` argument, but otherwise an agent has enough to call and interpret 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 (context, productType) are fully documented in the schema with an example for `context`. The description adds nothing about either parameter, so the baseline 3 for schema-does-the-work applies.

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 specific verb+resource ('List the prop firms ... together with every simulatable challenge') and enumerates the returned fields. It explicitly distinguishes itself from propfirms_search / propfirms_search_challenges / propfirms_search_offers, so an agent can route without opening sibling schemas.

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 an explicit ordering directive ('Call this first to discover the firmId + challengeId pairs accepted by propfirms_challenge_rules, propfirms_simulate, propfirms_optimal_risk, propfirms_compare and propfirms_simulate_trades') and names the alternative tools for the broader directory. Both when-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are 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