Skip to main content
Glama

TradingCalc MCP: Options, Forex, Risk Stats, Prediction Markets, On-Chain & Crypto Futures

by io.github.SKalinin909
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Risk Reward

workflow.run_risk_reward
Read-only

Full risk:reward analysis: takes a trade with entry, stop, AND target (all three). Calculates R:R ratio, position size, liquidation price, breakeven, and P&L at both stop and target. Returns a verdict: strong (3:1+) / good (2:1+) / marginal / poor, specifically graded on the R:R ratio. For a full setup check tied to a live exchange/symbol (including funding cost), see workflow.run_pre_trade_check; its verdict covers overall setup safety, not just R:R. Use when user asks "is this trade worth taking?" or "what's my risk reward on this setup?".

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mmrNoMaintenance margin rate (default 0.005)
sideYesTrade direction: "long" or "short"
leverageYesLeverage multiplier
risk_pctYesMax risk as % of account
stop_lossYesStop-loss price
entry_priceYesEntry price
take_profitYesTake-profit price
contractTypeNolinear = USDT-margined (default), inverse = coin-margined (e.g. Bybit BTCUSD). position_size/notional are USD notional (contracts) for inverse; pnl_at_stop/pnl_at_target come back denominated in the base coin.
fee_open_pctNoOpen fee rate (default 0.0002)
fee_close_pctNoClose fee rate (default 0.0005)
account_balanceYesAccount balance in USDT

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / side / description
      Added value: +"Trade direction: \"long\" or \"short\""
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / contractType
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "linear = USDT-margined (default), inverse = coin-margined (e.g. Bybit BTCUSD). position_size/notional are USD notional (contracts) for inverse; pnl_at_stop/pnl_at_target come back denominated in the base coin.",
+  "enum": [
+    "linear",
+    "inverse"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral value beyond that: it discloses the grading scale for the verdict (strong 3:1+ / good 2:1+ / marginal / poor) and that grading is on R:R alone, not overall setup safety. It does not discuss failure modes or input validation, keeping this 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?

The critical scoping and routing information is front-loaded, and the tool-vs-sibling boundary comes before the trigger phrases. Slightly long, with two example user quotes that are useful but could be trimmed.

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 carries the full burden of describing return values, and it does: it lists R:R, position size, liquidation price, breakeven, P&L at stop and target, and the verdict tiers. Combined with rich annotations and full schema coverage, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret this 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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented, including defaults and the subtle inverse-contract denomination semantics. The description only adds the emphasis that entry, stop, AND target are all required, which largely restates the required array; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource (full risk:reward analysis) and enumerates the computed outputs: R:R ratio, position size, liquidation price, breakeven, and P&L at stop/target. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the nearest sibling, workflow.run_pre_trade_check, and from forex/other R:R variants.

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 names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it ('For a full setup check tied to a live exchange/symbol (including funding cost), see workflow.run_pre_trade_check'), and states the user phrasings that should trigger this tool. It also implicitly states the precondition that all three price levels are required.

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

All TradingCalc MCP: Options, Forex, Risk Stats, Prediction Markets, On-Chain & Crypto Futures 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