Skip to main content
Glama

DeltaSignal ATLAS-7

by io.github.aitrailblazer

DeltaSignal ATLAS history

deltasignal_atlas_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this read-only tool to retrieve a historical ATLAS-7 covenant and stress series for one crypto public company ticker. It returns one compact row per ATLAS source_date, including debt, crypto fair value, BTC holdings, stress, risk tier, live-price fields, quality flags, and provenance needed for mNAV and Mirror Pulse joins. Parameters: ticker is required; source_date_from and source_date_to bound the inclusive ATLAS source-date range; limit defaults to 500 and is capped at 2000; offset paginates the dated series. Behavior: read-only and idempotent; it performs one HTTPS read, has no destructive side effects, and does not apply the latest ATLAS snapshot retroactively across history. Use this when the user needs historical ATLAS data, MSTR/Strategy time series, mNAV backtests, Mirror Pulse joins, or dated stress/risk snapshots.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum dated rows to return. Defaults to 500 and is capped at 2000.
offsetNoPagination offset over dated ATLAS rows.
tickerYesRequired crypto public company ticker. Examples: MSTR, COIN, MARA, RIOT.
source_date_toNoOptional inclusive ATLAS source-date upper bound in YYYY-MM-DD format.
source_date_fromNoOptional inclusive ATLAS source-date lower bound in YYYY-MM-DD format.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesHistorical ATLAS-7 issuer time series keyed by source_date.
provenanceYesTraceability information for the MCP tool response.
mcp_summaryYesConcise high-signal summary of the tool response. Maximum 140 characters.
usage_metadataNoPerformance and estimated cost metadata for this MCP tool call.
suggested_follow_upsYesConcrete next MCP calls an agent can run to continue the workflow.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds a meaningful behavioral nuance beyond annotations: 'does not apply the latest ATLAS snapshot retroactively across history,' which clarifies time-series semantics. It also mentions 'performs one HTTPS read,' reinforcing the read-only nature without contradicting the annotations.

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 description is appropriately structured with clear sections (Parameters, Behavior, Use) and front-loads the purpose in the first sentence. It is somewhat long but every sentence serves a function, and for a tool with 5 parameters and multiple behaviors, this level of detail is justified.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values in detail. It does list the output fields (debt, crypto fair value, BTC holdings, stress, risk tier, quality flags, provenance) and explains their purpose for mNAV and Mirror Pulse joins. Combined with the behavioral explanation and usage guidance, the description is contextually complete for a moderately complex historical data 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 baseline is 3. The description summarizes parameter behavior (e.g., 'inclusive ATLAS source-date range,' 'limit defaults to 500,' 'offset paginates') but these details already exist in the input schema. It does not introduce new meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'retrieve a historical ATLAS-7 covenant and stress series for one crypto public company ticker.' It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing 'historical' and explicitly stating it 'does not apply the latest ATLAS snapshot retroactively,' which separates it from current-snapshot or recent-history tools like atlas7_recent_history.

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 description provides explicit use cases in the final sentence: 'Use this when the user needs historical ATLAS data, MSTR/Strategy time series, mNAV backtests, Mirror Pulse joins, or dated stress/risk snapshots.' This gives clear context for when to invoke the tool, though it does not name specific alternative tools or provide 'when not to use' exclusions.

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

All DeltaSignal ATLAS-7 toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The tool set has extensive overlap: natural-language variants duplicate raw JSON tools (e.g., deltasignal_covenant_stress vs deltasignal_covenant_stress_natural), composite workflow tools duplicate low-level screens (deltasignal_alpha_sweep vs deltasignal_alpha_opportunities), and the atlas7_* and deltasignal_* prefixes repeat the same concepts (e.g., atlas7_covenant_stress vs deltasignal_covenant_stress). An agent would likely struggle to pick the right tool for a given intent.

Naming Consistency2/5

Three distinct prefixes (atlas7_, deltasignal_, strategix_) are used, and duplicate tool names appear across prefixes (e.g., atlas7_readiness vs deltasignal_readiness). Verb patterns are inconsistent, mixing nouns and verbs (atlas7_archive_search, deltasignal_thesis_create, deltasignal_morning_brief_natural), and there is no clear rule for raw, natural, composite, or resolver variants.

Tool Count1/5

With 81 tools, the server is massively over-scoped. Many are near-duplicates or overlapping composites; the core domain likely needs 20-30 tools at most. The count is far beyond what an agent can reasonably navigate, and it indicates a failure to consolidate or version the surface.

Completeness3/5

The set covers a broad range of functionality: screening, stress, alpha, peer comparison, history, tripcode resolution, synthetic ETF state, and thesis monitoring. However, there are lifecycle gaps (e.g., thesis_create has no corresponding update/delete, and the atlas7 vs deltasignal split leaves no unified surface). The duplication suggests comprehensive coverage in some areas and awkward holes in others.

Resources