Skip to main content
Glama

DeltaSignal ATLAS-7

by io.github.aitrailblazer

DeltaSignal company fundamentals

deltasignal_company_fundamentals
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this read-only tool to retrieve SEC XBRL-backed fundamentals for one crypto public company ticker. It returns filing period, entity identifiers, filing form, core financial values, provenance, and optional segment or related-party containers when requested. Parameters: ticker is required; period is optional YYYY-MM-DD; include_segments and include_related_party request additional containers when available and otherwise return availability metadata. Behavior: read-only and idempotent; it performs one HTTPS read, has no destructive side effects, and does not modify SEC data, accounts, files, or wallets. Use it when the user asks for revenue, net income, assets, cash, liabilities, equity, SEC filing context, or fact provenance; use alpha_signals or covenant_stress for modeled signal interpretation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
periodNoOptional YYYY-MM-DD reporting period. Omit for the latest available filing period.
tickerYesRequired crypto public company ticker. Examples: COIN, MSTR, MARA, RIOT, HUT, CLSK.
include_segmentsNoRequest segment fact container when available. Current runtime returns availability metadata even when segment facts are not populated.
include_related_partyNoRequest related-party transaction container when available. Current runtime returns availability metadata even when related-party facts are not populated.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesSEC XBRL-backed fundamentals for one crypto public company ticker.
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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds specific context: 'performs one HTTPS read, has no destructive side effects, and does not modify SEC data, accounts, files, or wallets,' and clarifies that optional containers return availability metadata. This exceeds annotation coverage without contradicting it.

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 well-structured: purpose first, then parameter summary, then behavior, then usage guidance. No filler or redundancy; every sentence contributes to agent understanding.

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 an output schema present, the description need not enumerate return fields. It fully covers purpose, usage triggers, parameter semantics, behavioral safety, and sibling differentiation, making it complete for a 4-parameter fundamental retrieval tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds nuance beyond schema by stating that optional parameters 'request additional containers when available and otherwise return availability metadata,' which clarifies fallback behavior not obvious from the schema alone.

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 ('retrieve') and resource ('SEC XBRL-backed fundamentals for one crypto public company ticker'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like alpha_signals or covenant_stress by mentioning those as alternatives for modeled signal interpretation.

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?

Explicitly states when to use the tool ('when the user asks for revenue, net income, assets, cash, liabilities, equity, SEC filing context, or fact provenance') and directs to alternatives ('use alpha_signals or covenant_stress for modeled signal interpretation'), giving both inclusion and exclusion guidance.

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