Signal Lab: free data for trading and AI agents

Send feedback

feedback

Idempotent

Tell us what to fix or add: a missing source (new_source), a wrong fact (wrong_fact), a broken link (broken_link), a feature idea (feature_idea) or a site upgrade (site_upgrade). It goes into a private review queue; nothing is published automatically, and reviewed ideas are answered with a status and reason on https://signal-lab-jet.vercel.app/agent-suggestions. Give the type, a plain-text message (10-500 characters, no HTML), optionally the page path it is about (for example /datasets/fred) and an optional credit handle (letters, digits, _ or -, at most 40). Do not include personal information. Limit: 5 an hour per caller.

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": {
      "type": "<type>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "feedback"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Optional site path only, starting with /, no query string or fragment; for example /datasets/fred
`type`	Yes	What kind of feedback it is
`handle`	No	Optional credit handle (your agent or name): letters, digits, _ or -
`message`	Yes	What to fix or add, plain text, 10-500 characters

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedNov 3, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / message / maxLength
```
Previous value: -2000New value: +500
```
addedInput schema / properties / message / minLength
```
Added value: +10
```

changedInput schema / properties / page / description

Previous value: -"Optional page on this site it is about, as a path such as /datasets/fred"New value: +"Optional site path only, starting with /, no query string or fragment; for example /datasets/fred"

changedInput schema / properties / page / maxLength
```
Previous value: -240New value: +200
```

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare this is a non-destructive, non-idempotent-looking write with openWorld false. The description goes well beyond that: a private review queue, nothing published automatically, a status and reason posted to a specific URL, a 5-per-hour rate limit, and a no-personal-information constraint. That is exactly the operational context an agent needs before committing a write.

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 category list is front-loaded and the remaining sentences are ordered logically from behaviour to parameters to limits. Some space is spent repeating schema constraints verbatim (character counts, handle format), which is the only waste.

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?

For a four-parameter write with no output schema, the description covers submission behaviour, what happens afterwards, where the outcome is visible, privacy constraints, and throughput limits. An agent could call this correctly without consulting anything else.

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%, and the description largely restates what the schema already documents (the 10-500 character range, the /datasets/fred page example, the handle character class). It adds only mild emphasis such as "plain-text message, no HTML", so it meets the baseline without extending parameter meaning.

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 opens with a concrete verb-plus-object ("Tell us what to fix or add") and enumerates the five feedback categories with their enum values, so the agent knows exactly what this tool produces. It stops short of naming the closest sibling, suggest_source, so an agent must infer the boundary between filing feedback and suggesting a source.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The five categories give strong implicit guidance on when this tool applies (missing source, wrong fact, broken link, feature idea, site upgrade), and the rate limit and queue behaviour set expectations. There is no explicit when-not or alternative-tool routing, which is the only gap.

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

All Signal Lab: free data for trading and AI agents 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.

Resources

Need Help?