Skip to main content
Glama

DeltaSignal ATLAS-7

by io.github.aitrailblazer

DeltaSignal public daily brief

deltasignal_public_daily_brief
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this read-only composite renderer for customer-facing DeltaSignal Daily Brief artifacts. It server-enforces the morning brief evidence plan, then renders a public-safe HTML brief and copy-ready text with plain-English explanations of risk tiers, top-stressed issuers, alpha screens, deltas, and evidence boundaries. Parameters: optional output_mode=compact only; do not pass ticker, limit, offset, source_date, period, or issuer filters because this preset owns exact arguments internally. Behavior: read-only and idempotent; it calls the bounded morning brief composite, has no destructive side effects, removes internal-only identifiers from the public copy, preserves non-advice language, and returns deterministic HTML plus copy_text for publishing workflows. Use it when the user asks for a public daily brief, customer-facing daily brief, investor-ready risk and opportunity scan, or copy-ready DeltaSignal article based on the current daily evidence.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
output_modeNoOptional response mode. Only compact is accepted in Phase 1.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesCustomer-facing DeltaSignal daily brief response. The data object includes rendered HTML, copy_text, public summary fields, term explanations, and a compact evidence boundary.
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

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, but the description adds significant behavioral context: 'server-enforces the morning brief evidence plan', 'removes internal-only identifiers from the public copy', 'preserves non-advice language', and 'returns deterministic HTML plus copy_text'. This goes well beyond the annotation hints.

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 dense but well-structured, with each sentence serving a purpose. It is longer than two sentences but justified given the tool's complexity. It repeats some annotation facts (read-only, idempotent) but in context, which is acceptable for a public-facing tool.

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?

Given the tool's complexity and the existence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, behavior, restrictions, and usage triggers. It also mentions output types (HTML and copy_text) even though an output schema exists, providing additional useful context about the workflow.

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% and the schema describes output_mode, but the description adds meaning by explaining why only output_mode is allowed: 'this preset owns exact arguments internally'. It also explicitly lists forbidden parameters, which clarifies the schema's additionalProperties:false constraint.

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 states a specific verb+resource: 'composite renderer for customer-facing DeltaSignal Daily Brief artifacts' and explicitly lists outputs ('public-safe HTML brief and copy-ready text'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing 'customer-facing', 'public-safe', and 'copy-ready', which separates it from internal brief tools like deltasignal_morning_brief.

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 usage guidance: 'Use it when the user asks for a public daily brief, customer-facing daily brief, investor-ready risk and opportunity scan, or copy-ready DeltaSignal article'. Also includes a clear exclusion: 'do not pass ticker, limit, offset, source_date, period, or issuer filters because this preset owns exact arguments internally'.

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