Skip to main content
Glama

BotSpot: AI Trading, Backtests and Bots

Create plan

create_plan

Creates a persisted, user-visible plan for substantial work in the current conversation. Use this for strategy builds, strategy edits, research, deployment setup, backtest analysis, broker investigation, and other multi-step tasks. Do not use this for greetings, small talk, simple answers, advice-only turns, critique-only turns, ordinary clarification, or no-op connectivity checks such as a current user message that is only 'test', 'ping', or 'testing'. Do not use this for preliminary discovery research whose purpose is deciding what to build, including broad outcome-only, vague profit, generic best-strategy, or underspecified make/build-something requests. Search first, summarize opportunities and risks, and ask concise build-choice questions without creating a plan or possible future build-step items. Forbidden sequence: broad/underspecified profitable or current-market build request -> web_search -> create_plan in the same turn. Your own recommendation after search is only a proposal; wait for the user's follow-up choice or acceptance before creating a plan. If you only need a user clarification before doing work, do not create a plan yet. If a plan already exists and user input is needed before continuing, use update_plan_item to mark the current item waiting with waitReason=waiting_for_user before asking the user. If an active plan already exists and replaceExisting is omitted, this call succeeds non-destructively by returning that active plan with reusedExisting=true; continue it with update_plan_item, add_plan_item, replace_plan_items, or complete_plan. A true replacement remains explicit: set replaceExisting=true, pass supersedesPlanId, and include replacementReason only when the existing plan is obsolete or the user changed the work. This does not create or modify strategies, backtests, deployments, trades, or tool access. Do not send a top-level rationale field. At the top level use only the documented plan fields; put item-specific rationale, evidence, status, and outcome inside the relevant items[] object. Every item must include the exact field completionCriteria with model-visible completion criteria so the agent has a concrete standard for marking it done. Domain-specific policy belongs in prompts and skills. This tool only persists the visible plan that the model provides. Plan items progress in visible order; outcome.status is plan-item satisfaction, not backtest.status or another external status. A partial or unsuccessful outcome does not by itself require a new row. Add a referenced follow-up only when genuinely new executable work is not already represented by a later plan item; otherwise keep limitations and fallback assumptions in the existing item's evidence and continue the existing plan. This is only the visible plan; after it is created, continue using the relevant domain tools instead of answering with only prose.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNo
itemsYes
titleYes
conversationIdNoOptional conversation UUID. Omit this field to use the current MCP conversation context; never pass placeholders such as `current`.
replaceExistingNoSet true only when an existing active plan is obsolete or the user explicitly changed the work. Omit this for normal continuation.
supersedesPlanIdNoThe active plan UUID being replaced. Use get_active_plan first if you do not know it.
replacementReasonNoRequired when replaceExisting=true. Explain why the current active plan is being cancelled instead of updated.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses behavior well beyond the lone destructiveHint=false annotation: active-plan reuse, non-destructive default behavior, explicit replacement semantics, plan-item progression, outcome-status meaning, and the fact that this tool does not modify strategies, backtests, deployments, trades, or tool access. The replacement branch is explicitly described rather than hidden.

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?

The description is front-loaded and organized around purpose, exclusions, replacement behavior, and item-structure rules. It is fairly long and dense, with some policy detail that could be tightened, but most sentences carry relevant routing or behavioral information.

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 the tool's complexity and the absence of an output schema, the description provides enough context for correct use: it explains plan lifecycle, active-plan reuse, replacement prerequisites, item completion criteria, and post-creation continuation with domain tools. Nothing essential for calling the tool correctly appears to be missing.

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?

The description adds important meaning for non-obvious fields such as replaceExisting, supersedesPlanId, replacementReason, conversationId context, and the requirement that every item include completionCriteria. It also prevents misuse by saying not to send a top-level rationale and where item rationale belongs. Some parameters, such as kind and several item status fields, are left to the schema.

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 and resource: it creates a persisted, user-visible plan for substantial work in the current conversation. It clearly distinguishes this from ordinary answers, discovery research, and domain tools, so an agent can identify its role without opening sibling schemas.

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 explicitly lists when to use the tool, when not to use it, and which alternative behavior to follow instead, including search-first discovery, clarification turns, and existing-plan continuation via update_plan_item. It also names a forbidden sequence, making the routing guidance unusually concrete.

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.