Skip to main content
Glama

FXMacroData

by io.github.fxmacrodata

Macro Heatmap Task

macro_heatmap_task
Read-only

Build a cross-currency macro heatmap from indicator time series and return a matrix with latest values, recent changes, and z-scores. Supports MCP Tasks for async execution when clients send task-augmented requests.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
end_dateNoOptional inclusive upper bound, YYYY-MM-DD.
currenciesNoComma-separated 3-letter currency codes (lowercase preferred). Supported values include: AUD, BRL, CAD, CHF, CNH, CNY, DKK, EUR, GBP, ILS, JPY, NGN, NOK, NZD, PEN, SEK, THB, USD.
indicatorsNoComma-separated indicator slugs to include in the matrix. Supported values include: 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.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the async execution capability and the matrix output nature, but does not surface behaviors like default date ranges, handling of empty parameter sets, or result size limits. This is acceptable but not rich.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The primary purpose and output are front-loaded, and the async MCP Tasks note earns its place as an execution-relevant capability.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description defines the output matrix components, which is helpful given there is no output schema. However, it omits practical details an agent needs to call the tool robustly: whether at least one currency or indicator is required, what happens with overlapping sibling tools, default behavior when no dates are supplied, and how invalid inputs are handled. These gaps prevent a higher score.

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 coverage is 100%, with every parameter—start_date, end_date, currencies, indicators—already documented with descriptions, examples, and supported values. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Build a cross-currency macro heatmap...' and explicitly states the output shape: 'a matrix with latest values, recent changes, and z-scores.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling task tools like macro_briefing_task or macro_research_pack_task.

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?

The description does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or conditions. With many sibling task tools present, the lack of differentiation means an agent gets no guidance on selecting this tool. The only contextual hint is async MCP Tasks support, which is an execution detail, not a usage guideline.

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

All FXMacroData 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

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.

Resources