Backtesting Arena

Get Strategy Performance Snapshot (per Asset)

arena_get_strategy_performance

Read-only

How did this exact strategy, asset and interval perform? Aggregated backtest performance for ONE specific (strategy, asset, interval) combination. Returns run_count, avg_cagr, avg_win_rate, avg_drawdown, effective_years, vs_buy_hold comparison (beats_buy_hold, cagr_delta, plus noise_floor_pp + distinguishable — whether the gap clears the measured noise of parameter and window choices; use that verdict, do not hold other gaps against this floor yourself) and an evidence block declaring the gate machine-readably (gate_applies_to: stats.run_count, threshold 5 runs, benchmark value, aggregation data window). since_publication (BTCUSDT/ETHUSDT only) is a SEPARATE forward record from the date the strategy's default behaviour was frozen (since, since_basis) on its default interval: total return, buy-and-hold return, excess, drawdown, round-trips, too_short under 30 — not annualised and never to be combined with stats; null carries a reason. For multi-strategy overview use arena_get_strategy_insights. Use this to answer 'How does strategy X perform on asset Y?'. [Free tier]

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": "<strategy>",
      "asset": "<asset>"
    },
    "name": "arena_get_strategy_performance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`asset`	Yes	Crypto pair / symbol (e.g. BTCUSDT, ETHUSDT). Case-insensitive.
`interval`	No	Default '1w'. Candle interval: '1d' daily, '2d'/'3d' multi-day, '1w' weekly, '1M' monthly. Multi-day candles (2d/3d) are anchored to the Unix epoch, so one of n possible alignments is used. Measured on our own corpus, the choice of alignment alone moves CAGR by 6.66 pp on average (max 12.30). Treat differences below that as not distinguishable — 1d/2d/3d behaved as one block in our tests, not a ranking.
`strategy`	Yes	Strategy key (e.g. rsi_sma, golden_cross). See arena_get_strategies for valid keys.
`asset_type`	No	Optional asset class filter to disambiguate (e.g. when same pair-name exists in two classes).
`ref_strategy`	No	Benchmark reference. Default 'bh' (Buy & Hold).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 29, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

Changed3 schema fields changedAug 25, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

removedInput schema / properties / context

Removed 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"
-}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "strategy",
-  "asset",
-  "context"
-]New value: +[
+  "strategy",
+  "asset"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedJul 31, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / interval / description

Previous value: -"Default '1w'."New value: +"Default '1w'. Candle interval: '1d' daily, '2d'/'3d' multi-day, '1w' weekly, '1M' monthly. Multi-day candles (2d/3d) are anchored to the Unix epoch, so one of n possible alignments is used. Measured on our own corpus, the choice of alignment alone moves CAGR by 6.66 pp on average (max 12.30). Treat differences below that as not distinguishable — 1d/2d/3d behaved as one block in our tests, not a ranking."

Changed1 schema field changedJul 31, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / interval / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "1d",
-  "1w",
-  "1M"
-]New value: +[
+  "1d",
+  "2d",
+  "3d",
+  "1w",
+  "1M"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedJul 24, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / asset_type / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "crypto"
-]New value: +[
+  "crypto",
+  "tokenized_equity",
+  "tokenized_etf",
+  "commodities"
+]

Changed2 schema fields changedJul 14, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / asset / description

Previous value: -"Pair / symbol (e.g. BTCUSDT, AAPL.US). Case-insensitive."New value: +"Crypto pair / symbol (e.g. BTCUSDT, ETHUSDT). Case-insensitive."

changedInput schema / properties / asset_type / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "crypto",
-  "stock",
-  "etf",
-  "commodities",
-  "forex"
-]New value: +[
+  "crypto"
+]

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint, yet the description discloses the gate (minimum 5 runs on stats.run_count), the presence of a machine-readable evidence block, the noise-floor rule for judging gaps, and the critical warning that since_publication is a separate non-annualised forward record that must never be combined with stats. It also flags the free tier and that nulls carry a reason — all behavior an agent could not infer from the structured fields.

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?

Front-loaded with the question and the one-combination scope, and nearly every clause carries decision-relevant content. It is, however, a single very dense paragraph mixing return-field inventory, noise-floor policy and forward-record caveats, which raises cognitive load for a first read.

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?

With no output schema, the description enumerates the returned fields (run_count, avg_cagr, avg_win_rate, avg_drawdown, effective_years, vs_buy_hold, evidence, since_publication) and explains how to interpret them, including the too_short under-30 rule. Nothing essential for correct invocation or interpretation 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%, with enums and per-parameter explanations (including the alignment-noise caveat on interval), so the schema already does the heavy lifting. The description reinforces the aggregation window and default-interval semantics of since_publication but adds no new per-parameter syntax or constraints beyond that. 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?

Opens with a concrete question the tool answers and states the exact scope: aggregated backtest performance for ONE specific (strategy, asset, interval) combination. It explicitly contrasts with arena_get_strategy_insights for the multi-strategy case, so an agent can route between the two without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit selection rule ('For multi-strategy overview use arena_get_strategy_insights') and a literal use case ('Use this to answer How does strategy X perform on asset Y?'). It does not mention other close siblings such as arena_get_strategy_performance_by_regime or arena_is_distinguishable, so the when-not guidance is partial rather than exhaustive.

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

All Backtesting Arena 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.