Gemral Edge

Breakout Watch Scored Intelligence

get_breakout_watch

Query active Breakout Watch objects ranked by PriorityScore (BreakoutScore * Probability). Filterable by alert tier (VIRAL_BREAKOUT, HIGH_CONVICTION, ELEVATED, STANDARD).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_breakout_watch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`alert_tier`	No	Alert tier filter

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notice`	No	Free-tier upgrade notice; only when results are masked/delayed.
`results`	Yes	Tool result payload (read-only evidence). Shape varies by tool; scoring weights are never exposed.
`history_limit`	No	Present when the license limits history depth: earliest_allowed date, history_days and how many older items were removed.
`deprecated_fields`	No	Present only while a renamed key is still returned next to its replacement: field (old key), replacement (new key, same value), removal (ISO date after which the old key is gone).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 26, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / deprecated_fields

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Present only while a renamed key is still returned next to its replacement: field (old key), replacement (new key, same value), removal (ISO date after which the old key is gone).",
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

C2.5/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description says 'Query', which strongly implies a read-only retrieval operation, but annotations declare readOnlyHint=false. This is a direct contradiction, and the description does nothing to clarify what side effects or state changes might occur. The only behavioral detail added is the ranking formula, not the mutation semantics.

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?

Two sentences with no filler, and the core purpose and ranking formula are front-loaded. The only minor weakness is that the ranking formula could be seen as extra detail, but it is useful context and not wasteful.

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 an output schema exists (so return values need not be explained), the description leaves significant gaps for correct invocation: it omits any mention of the 'limit' parameter, does not define 'active' status, and gives no usage guidance relative to siblings. For a two-parameter query tool, this is insufficient.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 50%: the 'limit' parameter has no description in the schema, and the tool description does not explain it either. The description repeats the alert_tier enum values already present in the schema but adds no new meaning, such as how 'active' is defined or how limit interacts with ranking.

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?

States a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('Breakout Watch objects') and describes the ranking logic, which is clear. However, it does not differentiate this tool from the many sibling signal-related tools (e.g., get_top_signals, get_precursor_signals), so an agent must infer the distinction.

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 only mentions that results are filterable by alert tier. It provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no prerequisites. The agent is left to guess the appropriate context.

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

All Gemral Edge tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.