Skip to main content
Glama

closelook-intelligence

by io.github.closelookventure

Stock snapshot

get_stock_snapshot
Read-only

One covered stock through Closelook’s own engines, end-of-day: the Directional Flow trend score with its 5/21/63-day score changes and trend state, up-day vs down-day beta with the engine’s structural state (healthy leader / fragile / distribution / decoupling), and Closelook index memberships. Pair with get_price_history for bars and get_signal_scores for the quality-score panel.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tickerYesTicker as displayed on closelook.net, e.g. NVDA, ASML, 8035

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying the data is end-of-day and enumerating the exact metrics returned (trend scores, beta, structural state, index memberships), which helps the agent understand output nature.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first packs the tool's purpose and output details, the second provides integration guidance. No redundant or filler content.

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 one parameter, existing annotations, and no output schema, the description fully enumerates the return fields (trend scores, beta, structural state, index memberships), mentions frequency (end-of-day), and suggests companion tools. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 covers 100% of the single parameter (ticker) with example values. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves a snapshot of a stock's directional flow trend scores, beta, structural state, and index memberships. It uses specific resource language ('One covered stock') and distinguishes from siblings by recommending companion tools for price bars and signal scores.

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?

The description explicitly suggests pairing with get_price_history and get_signal_scores for complementary data, providing clear context for when to use this tool in combination. However, it does not include explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All closelook-intelligence 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools map cleanly to a distinct Closelook surface — indices, macro boards, rankings, research, tape, wires. There are a few near-neighbor pairs like get_df_ranking vs get_ranking and get_market_instrument vs get_stock_snapshot, but the detailed descriptions resolve most potential misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows a clear imperative verb + noun pattern — get_, define_term, compare_indices, search_closelook — with consistent snake_case and essentially all resource-oriented nouns. The naming is predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count4/5

25 tools is on the heavy side, above the typical well-scoped range, but each endpoint maps to a meaningful product area of Closelook's public site. The count is justified by the breadth of a financial intelligence service, though it could have been trimmed slightly.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the major Closelook workflows: indices, rankings, macro monitors, stock-level data, earnings, wires, research search, and portfolio snapshots. For a read-only intelligence server there are no obvious dead ends — depth and background material is paired with lookups and daily updates.

Resources