Skip to main content
Glama

Event Impact Replay Task

event_impact_replay_task
Read-only

Create a point-in-time replay timeline mapping macro announcements to FX context and heuristic impact markers. Supports MCP Tasks for async execution when clients send task-augmented requests.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
baseNoFX base currency for market context, 3-letter ISO code (case-insensitive). Supported: AUD, BRL, CAD, CHF, CNH, CNY, DKK, EUR, GBP, ILS, JPY, NGN, NOK, NZD, PEN, SEK, THB, USD.eur
quoteNoFX quote currency for market context, 3-letter ISO code (case-insensitive). Supported: AUD, BRL, CAD, CHF, CNH, CNY, DKK, EUR, GBP, ILS, JPY, NGN, NOK, NZD, PEN, SEK, THB, USD.usd
currencyYesCurrency for macro event series, 3-letter ISO code (case-insensitive). Supported: AUD, BRL, CAD, CHF, CNH, CNY, DKK, EUR, GBP, ILS, JPY, NGN, NOK, NZD, PEN, SEK, THB, USD.
end_dateNoOptional inclusive upper bound, YYYY-MM-DD.
indicatorYesIndicator slug for event replay. Supported examples: average_hourly_earnings, average_hourly_earnings_mom, balance_on_goods, balance_on_services, breakeven_inflation_rate, broad_money, building_approvals, building_permits, business_confidence, capital_account_balance, cb_assets, commodity_price_energy, commodity_price_ex_energy, commodity_price_index, commodity_prices, consumer_confidence, core_inflation, core_inflation_median, core_inflation_mom, core_inflation_trim, core_pce, core_pce_mom, credit_growth, crude_oil_inventories, current_account_balance, dairy_exports, deposit_rates, durable_goods_orders, employment, exports, financial_account_balance, foreign_reserves, full_time_employment, fx_reserves, gdp, gdp_growth_q4_yoy, gold_reserves, gov_bond_10y, gov_bond_1y, gov_bond_20y, gov_bond_2y, gov_bond_30y, gov_bond_3y, gov_bond_40y, gov_bond_4y, gov_bond_5y, gov_bond_7y, government_debt, house_price_index, house_prices, household_credit, housing_starts, imports, inflation, inflation_linked_bond, inflation_mom, initial_jobless_claims, international_assets, international_liabilities, job_openings, m1, m2, m3, nairu, natural_gas_storage, net_foreign_asset_position, non_farm_payrolls, non_farm_payrolls_change, part_time_employment, participation_rate, pce, pce_mom, policy_rate, policy_rate_midpoint, policy_rate_mlf, policy_rate_mro, policy_rate_target_lower, ppi, ppi_mom, primary_income_balance, retail_sales, retail_sales_control_group, retail_sales_ex_autos, retail_sales_ex_autos_and_gas, risk_free_rate, secondary_income_balance, sight_deposits, snb_balance_sheet, tankan_capex, terms_of_trade, trade_balance, trade_weighted_index, trimmed_mean_inflation, unemployment, wage_price_index, wages.
start_dateNoOptional inclusive lower bound, YYYY-MM-DD.
lookback_eventsNoMaximum number of recent events to include in replay.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds a useful behavioral note about supporting MCP Tasks for async execution, but it does not explain what the replay timeline contains, how heuristic impact markers are derived, or what 'point-in-time' guarantees are enforced.

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 two tight sentences: the first states the core purpose, and the second provides a relevant async-execution capability. There is no filler or redundant material.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Although the schema documents all parameters, there is no output schema and the description does not explain the shape, format, or interpretation of the returned replay timeline. For a tool with seven parameters and no output schema, this is a meaningful completeness gap.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no parameter-specific details or invocation nuances, which keeps this at the baseline score.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action and resource: 'Create a point-in-time replay timeline mapping macro announcements to FX context and heuristic impact markers.' This clearly distinguishes it from many siblings by emphasizing replay, FX context, and impact markers. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, so it stops short of a perfect 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like known_at_time_task, fx_backtest_task, or macro_war_room_task. The only contextual note is about MCP Tasks async execution, which describes invocation mode, not selection criteria.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes with detailed descriptions; the visual_artifact variants are explicitly duplicate payloads for chart rendering. However, several task and analysis tools (macro_briefing_task, macro_research_pack_task, indicator_intel_task) have overlapping scopes and could cause misselection despite different outputs.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names are consistently snake_case with systematic _task and _visual_artifact suffixes, making the pattern predictable. Minor deviations like 'ping', 'subscribe_for_mcp_access', and a few noun-only names (e.g., 'forex', 'commodities') break a strict verb_noun pattern but remain readable.

Tool Count2/5

At 48 tools, the surface is far beyond the typical well-scoped server and risks overwhelming agents. The broad macro/FX domain justifies some size, but 48 is excessive and could be consolidated (e.g., merging visual artifact pairs or grouping task tools).

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full macro/FX workflow: data discovery (data_catalogue), raw queries (indicator_query, forex, commodities), visual artifacts, release calendar, news, COT, sentiment, seasonality, backtesting, scenario modeling, portfolio risk, and reference tools. No obvious dead ends or missing lifecycle operations for a read-heavy data server.