Skip to main content
Glama

DeltaSignal ATLAS-7

by io.github.aitrailblazer

DeltaSignal daily change evidence

deltasignal_daily_change_evidence
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this read-only drilldown tool only when the user asks why one issuer or CIK was flagged in daily changes. It returns paginated raw CompanyFacts tag evidence for a specific ticker or CIK, plus page metadata and issuer identity. Parameters: ticker or cik is required; source_date is optional; limit defaults to 100 and is capped at 250; offset paginates the raw tag page. Behavior: read-only and idempotent; it performs one internal daily-changes read, filters evidence for one issuer/change, and has no destructive side effects. Do not use it for routine monitoring, Morning Brief, or Alpha Sweep unless the user explicitly asks for proof.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cikNoOptional SEC CIK. Required when ticker is absent.
limitNoMaximum raw tag evidence rows to return. Default 100, maximum 250.
offsetNoPagination offset for raw tag evidence rows.
tickerNoOptional public-company ticker. Required when cik is absent.
source_dateNoOptional CompanyFacts activity source date. Omit for latest activity date.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesIssuer-specific paginated daily-change 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

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds context about internal operations ('performs one internal daily-changes read, filters evidence') and confirms no destructive side effects, which complements the annotations without redundancy.

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 organized into labeled sections (parameters, behavior) and front-loads the purpose. Every sentence contributes meaning, though the parameter summary is slightly redundant with the schema.

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?

Given that an output schema exists and annotations are thorough, the description covers the essential context: trigger, scope, parameters, behavior, and exclusions. It does not discuss error handling or both-ticker-and-cik scenarios, but these are minor for a drilldown 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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents each parameter's constraints and conditional requirements. The description paraphrases these ('ticker or cik is required', 'limit defaults to 100...'), but adds no new semantic information 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 explicitly states a specific use case ('when the user asks why one issuer or CIK was flagged in daily changes') and names the resource ('paginated raw CompanyFacts tag evidence'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like deltasignal_daily_changes by focusing on single-issuer evidence drilldown.

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?

It provides clear 'when to use' ('only when...') and explicit 'when not to use' (routine monitoring, Morning Brief, Alpha Sweep) boundaries. The conditional 'unless the user explicitly asks for proof' further clarifies appropriate invocation.

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