MangroveAI

get_trades_for_strategy

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read closed trades from MangroveAI for one strategy belonging to the authenticated user and organization. Uses the same MangroveAI record as list_trades; these are execution records, not backtest fills.

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": {
      "strategy_id": "<strategy_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_trades_for_strategy"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum results.
`offset`	No	Pagination offset in the result units documented by the tool; zero starts the first page.
`strategy_id`	Yes	The strategy's UUID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 14, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / limit / default
```
Previous value: -50New value: +25
```

Changed4 schema fields changedNov 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / limit / default
```
Added value: +50
```
addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
```
Added value: +"Maximum results."
```

addedInput schema / properties / offset

Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Pagination offset in the result units documented by the tool; zero starts the first page.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / strategy_id / description
```
Added value: +"The strategy's UUID."
```

First observedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety bar is low. The description still adds real context: results are restricted to the caller's user and organization, only closed trades are returned, and the data are execution records rather than backtest fills. It does not mention pagination or result volume, which keeps it from 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?

Two compact sentences with the scope stated first and no redundant or filler wording. The provenance note is useful rather than padding, though the list_trades cross-reference could be merged more tightly into the scoping sentence.

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?

Only three parameters, all schema-documented, and no output schema to explain, so the description's job is mainly scoping and provenance, which it covers. It is slightly incomplete on pagination expectations given the limit/offset pair, but nothing critical to a correct call 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 description coverage is 100%, so limit, offset and strategy_id are already fully documented in the schema, and the baseline of 3 applies. The description confirms the strategy scoping but adds no syntax, format, or interplay guidance (e.g. how limit and offset combine) beyond the schema text.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Read closed trades from MangroveAI') and narrows scope to a single strategy owned by the authenticated user and organization. The clause 'these are execution records, not backtest fills' separates it from the backtest-fill sibling without naming it, so an agent can route correctly.

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?

Implies usage via the ownership scope ('one strategy belonging to the authenticated user and organization') and clarifies it reads the same MangroveAI record as list_trades. However, it never states when to choose this over list_trades or get_backtest_trades, and gives no prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the choice to inference.

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

All MangroveAI 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.