Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

MangroveAI

by io.github.MangroveTechnologies
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

verify_strategy

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a saved strategy against everything that has to be true for it to run: the signal names and their parameter keys, the roles composing, a timeframe on every signal, and a timeframe on the strategy. Call it after saving and BEFORE backtesting -- a backtest spends the person's allowance the moment it is submitted, whether or not it runs, and these are the faults that make it fail at setup with nothing measured. It reads what is STORED, so it answers for the strategy as it exists rather than as it was described. warnings are judgements it cannot make for you -- a parameter still at its library default -- and do not stop a run.

[Access: pay 0.005 USDC via x402 (PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header) OR authenticate with an API key. An x402-capable client will auto-pay; API-key clients pay nothing per call.]

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": "verify_strategy"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
strategy_idYesThe strategy's UUID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description is consistent with them while adding real context: it validates STORED state rather than described state, distinguishes hard faults from non-blocking `warnings`, and discloses the x402 per-call payment path. The only gap is no mention of the response shape for passing checks, which is minor for a validation tool.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Front-loaded with the action and the sequencing rule, then the rationale, then the warnings caveat, with the access/payment note bracketed separately. Dense but every sentence adds decision-relevant information; nothing is filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by naming the two result classes (setup faults vs `warnings`) and their consequences. For a one-parameter, read-only validator, an agent has everything needed to decide when and how to call it.

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?

Single required parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already carries the meaning of `strategy_id`. The description adds a small but useful nuance -- that the ID is resolved against stored state, not a described draft -- which prevents agents from passing a transient handle.

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 specific verb and resource (check a saved strategy) and enumerates exactly what is validated: signal names, parameter keys, composing roles, per-signal timeframes, and strategy timeframe. That enumeration separates it cleanly from evaluate_strategy (performance) and validate_signal_params (single-signal params).

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?

Gives an explicit ordering rule -- 'Call it after saving and BEFORE backtesting' -- and justifies it with the consequence (a backtest spends allowance on submission whether or not it runs). It also clarifies the warning-vs-failure distinction so the agent knows what to do with each outcome.

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

All MangroveAI 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