Skip to main content
Glama

DeltaSignal ATLAS-7

by io.github.aitrailblazer

DeltaSignal covenant stress

deltasignal_covenant_stress
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this read-only tool for ATLAS-7 covenant stress analysis on crypto public companies. Pass ticker for a single-issuer detail view, or omit ticker to screen the active issuer universe with risk, quality, debt-coverage, linkbase, minimum-stress, limit, and offset filters. It returns filing-backed stress, headroom, risk tier, debt coverage, quality, linkbase provenance, live-price deltas, and metadata needed for covenant-risk research. Parameters: ticker selects detail mode; without ticker, limit/offset paginate list mode, min_stress is 0-100, and risk_tier, quality_flag, debt_coverage_status, and linkbase_only narrow the screen. Behavior: read-only and idempotent; it performs one HTTPS read, has no destructive side effects, and does not change filings, portfolios, wallets, or account state. Use top_stressed for the default ranked universe, peer_ranking for relative peer context, and alpha_signals when the user asks for opportunity or edge rather than covenant stress.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum rows for list mode. Use 10-25 for concise screens.
offsetNoPagination offset for list mode.
periodNoOptional YYYY-MM-DD filing period for ticker detail mode.
tickerNoOptional crypto public company ticker. When set, returns detail for that issuer. Examples: MARA, RIOT, COIN, MSTR.
risk_tierNoOptional risk tier filter for list mode, such as HIGH, MODERATE, LOW, or UNCLASSIFIED.
min_stressNoOptional minimum stress score for list mode.
source_dateNoOptional YYYY-MM-DD DeltaSignal source date for list mode.
quality_flagNoOptional data quality filter for list mode, such as High, Medium, or Low.
linkbase_onlyNoRestrict list mode to issuers backed by SEC XBRL linkbase/rooted facts.
debt_coverage_statusNoOptional debt coverage status filter, such as resolved_nonzero, legitimate_zero_debt, or low_confidence_missing_debt.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesCovenant stress detail when ticker is supplied, or list-mode response with data and meta when ticker is omitted.
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

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes beyond annotations by stating it performs one HTTPS read, has no destructive side effects, and does not change filings, portfolios, wallets, or account state. This adds concrete context to the readOnly/idempotent hints without contradicting them.

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?

Four dense sentences that each earn their place: purpose, modes, return content, parameter semantics, behavior, and alternatives. Front-loads the core purpose and flows logically without 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?

Complete for a complex tool with 10 optional parameters and output schema. Covers both modes, all filter groups, behavioral guarantees, and alternative tools. Output schema handles return-value details, so the description's context is sufficient for selection and invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

While schema covers all 10 parameters, the description adds semantic grouping: explains ticker selects detail mode, limit/offset paginate list mode, min_stress range, and that risk_tier, quality_flag, debt_coverage_status, and linkbase_only narrow the screen. This clarifies parameter interactions beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool performs ATLAS-7 covenant stress analysis on crypto public companies, with specific modes (detail vs. list). It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by naming top_stressed, peer_ranking, and alpha_signals as alternatives.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: pass ticker for detail, omit for list screening. Names alternative tools for different intents (top_stressed for default ranking, peer_ranking for peer context, alpha_signals for opportunity/edge), making the usage decision unambiguous.

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