Skip to main content
Glama

DeltaSignal ATLAS-7

by io.github.aitrailblazer

DeltaSignal Coinbase perp factor history

deltasignal_coinbase_perp_factors
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this read-only tool when the user wants persisted Coinbase INTX market-factor history for one perp product. It returns one product's venue-pure factor history, including factor rows, deltas, quality state, and optional full market inputs or lineage. Parameters: product is required; optional source_date or source_date_from/source_date_to, underlying_ticker, mode=compact|full, limit, and offset. Behavior: read-only and idempotent with no destructive side effects; it does not fetch live exchange state or write recorder artifacts on demand.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNoOptional response mode: compact or full.
limitNoMaximum factor-history rows to return. Defaults to 25 and is capped at 100 through MCP.
offsetNoPagination offset over factor-history rows.
productYesRequired Coinbase INTX product_id or contract_symbol, for example AI-PERP-INTX.
source_dateNoOptional exact source date in YYYY-MM-DD format.
source_date_toNoOptional inclusive source-date upper bound in YYYY-MM-DD format.
source_date_fromNoOptional inclusive source-date lower bound in YYYY-MM-DD format.
underlying_tickerNoOptional underlying ticker filter to keep product routing explicit.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesCoinbase INTX perp market-factor history assembled from persisted venue-pure recorder evidence.
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

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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 beyond that by stating it does not fetch live exchange state or write recorder artifacts on demand, clarifying the tool's non-interactive nature. This adds genuine context without contradiction.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the use case, followed by parameter enumeration and behavior statement. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The tool has an output schema and the description covers the input parameters, response components (factor rows, deltas, quality state, optional full inputs/lineage), and behavioral constraints. Sibling context is provided by the 'one perp product' framing. No significant gaps.

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 coverage is 100% and all parameters have descriptions. The description lists the parameters and notes required vs optional, and clarifies that mode accepts compact/full. This adds a little meaning but mostly mirrors the schema, so 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 clearly states the verb ('returns') and resource ('one perp product's venue-pure factor history'), and differentiates from siblings by specifying 'for one perp product' and 'factor history' as opposed to calculation history, constituents, rankings, etc. It also mentions optional full market inputs or lineage, providing a specific scope.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool ('when the user wants persisted Coinbase INTX market-factor history for one perp product'), giving clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, so it falls short of a 5.

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