Skip to main content
Glama

DeltaSignal ATLAS-7

by io.github.aitrailblazer

DeltaSignal SEC/XBRL TripCode generate

deltasignal_generate_filing_tripcode
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this read-only SEC/XBRL identity tool to generate a deterministic TF-XBRL resolver object for a DeltaSignal evidence object. Parameters: pass ticker=HUT with no filing overrides for the HUT 2026-Q1 10-Q seed object, or provide cik, issuer, filing_type, filing_period, and source document fields for explicit generation. Behavior: idempotent and local for the MVP; it has no destructive side effects, does not modify SEC filings, does not call wallets or x402 settlement, and never replaces SEC accession numbers, CIKs, form types, reporting periods, or XBRL concept identities. Use the returned TripCode as a subscriber-facing join key from article nodes, research rivers, SEC evidence, and DeltaSignal outputs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cikNoSEC CIK, with or without CIK prefix.
issuerNoIssuer ticker or short symbol. Prefer ticker for public companies.
tickerNoIssuer ticker. HUT is the seeded MVP ticker.
companyNoSEC registrant company name.
filing_dateNoSEC filing date.
filing_typeNoSEC form type such as 10-Q or 8-K.
report_dateNoSEC report date or period end.
filing_periodNoNormalized filing period such as 2026-Q1.
xbrl_instanceNoXBRL instance document reference when available.
primary_filingNoPrimary SEC filing document reference.
research_riverNoOptional prior TF-SUB article TripCodes linked to this filing object.
accession_numberNoSEC accession number when the object is filing-specific.
latest_article_nodeNoOptional latest TF-SUB article node linked to this filing evidence object.
companyfacts_snapshotNoCompanyFacts snapshot reference when available.
deltasignal_method_versionNoOptional method version override for deterministic regeneration tests.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesGenerated SEC/XBRL TripCode resolver object.
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
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by stating idempotence, local execution, no side effects, no wallet/x402 calls, and that it never replaces SEC identifiers. This provides concrete behavioral transparency that complements the readOnly and destructive hints. No contradictions.

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 dense but well-structured, covering purpose, parameters, behavior, and output usage in three sentences. It front-loads the tool's role and avoids filler.

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 correctly focuses on invocation and behavior. It gives enough context for the MVP seed object and explicit generation, and explains how the returned TripCode is used. The tool is fully specified for an agent to select it.

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?

The schema has per-parameter descriptions for all 15 parameters (100% coverage), and the description adds usage patterns by identifying seed parameters (ticker=HUT) and explicit generation parameters (cik, issuer, filing_type, filing_period, source documents). This adds value 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?

The description clearly states the tool's action: 'generate a deterministic TF-XBRL resolver object for a DeltaSignal evidence object' and explains the TripCode's role as a join key. It differentiates from siblings like the article tripcode generator by specifying SEC/XBRL filing identity, and the title/description match.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: pass ticker=HUT for the seed object or supply cik, issuer, filing_type, filing_period, and source document fields for explicit generation. It does not explicitly contrast with resolve_filing_tripcode, but the 'generate' vs 'resolve' distinction is evident from the description and title.

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