EmidLabs Backtest

Get Confirmation Source

get_confirmation_source

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetches a submitted confirmation source by id. By default (waitForCompletion: true) polls internally until it finishes, so one call returns one final answer. No trade-outcome fields here at all (no PnlR/WinRate/...) — a confirmation source never opens a position. Once Completed, its id can be used as a confirmationSources sourceId in submit_backtest; its raw signal timeline is available separately via get_confirmation_source_signals.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	The id returned by submit_confirmation_source.
`pollTimeoutMs`	No	Defaults to 120000 (2 minutes).
`backtestApiKey`	No	Your EmidLabs backtest API key. Not needed if this connector was added with a static 'x-api-key' header.
`backtestBaseUrl`	No	Defaults to the public production API.
`waitForCompletion`	No	If true (default), polls internally until the confirmation source finishes or pollTimeoutMs elapses.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No
`status`	No
`assetPair`	No
`runtimeMs`	No	How long the analyser actually took to compute this confirmation source's signal timeline, in milliseconds. Null until Status is "Completed".
`timeframe`	No
`errorMessage`	No
`unitsConsumed`	No	The actual execution-unit cost, same pool/rate as a regular backtest — computing a confirmation source's signal timeline costs the same per candle as simulating trades, it just skips the trade simulation itself.
`candlesProcessed`	No	Number of candles the analyser processed. Null until Status is "Completed". This is raw volume, not the plan's billing unit — see UnitsConsumed for that.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses the internal polling behavior, that one call returns one final answer, and that the tool never opens a position. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond what annotations alone provide.

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?

Three sentences with no filler; the first sentence front-loads the core action, and subsequent sentences pack high-value semantics about polling, outcome scope, and sibling routing. Every clause earns its place.

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 and fully documented parameters, the description supplies the missing conceptual context: polling semantics, lifecycle (Completed → sourceId), and the distinction from trade-outcome and signal-timeline tools. No critical behavior is left unexplained.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning for the id parameter by explaining that a Completed id can be used as a confirmationSources sourceId in submit_backtest, and it reinforces the waitForCompletion default polling semantics.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Fetches a submitted confirmation source by id') and sharply distinguishes itself from get_confirmation_source_signals by noting the raw signal timeline is available separately. It also states that no trade-outcome fields appear, preventing confusion with backtest result siblings.

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 names the sibling get_confirmation_source_signals as the destination for raw signal timelines, and gives an explicit when-not through 'No trade-outcome fields here at all — a confirmation source never opens a position.' The lifecycle note that a Completed id can become a confirmationSources sourceId in submit_backtest gives actionable downstream context.

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

All EmidLabs Backtest tools Inspect

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

A4.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource/action: single backtests, batch backtests, trades, confirmation sources, signals, and asset discovery. The batch getter is explicitly differentiated from the single-result getter, and confirmation sources are clearly separated from tradable backtests.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a clear verb_noun pattern: submit_backtest, submit_backtest_batch, get_backtest_result, get_backtest_trades, get_confirmation_source, list_available_assets. Modifiers like batch, trades, and signals are consistent and make each tool's role predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Nine tools is well-scoped for a backtesting server: three submission endpoints, four result-fetching endpoints, signal retrieval, and asset discovery. There is no apparent redundancy or tool bloat.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full backtest lifecycle: submitting single and batch backtests, retrieving aggregate results, drilling into trades, creating and reading confirmation sources, and discovering available assets. No critical operation appears missing for the stated domain.

Resources

Need Help?