BotSpot: AI Trading, Backtests and Bots

Switch active strategy

switch_active_strategy

DestructiveIdempotent

Changes this conversation's active strategy workspace to another strategy owned by the user. Use only when the user explicitly asks to work with, compare against, copy from, or move to a different strategy. If the user explicitly names or identifies a different owned strategy, that explicit target beats the currently open page/context; resolve the named strategy first and switch only when the user is actually moving the workspace target. If revisionId is omitted, the newest accessible revision is selected. This does not copy files by itself; use file tools after switching or when reading another owned strategy.

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": "switch_active_strategy"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`revisionId`	No	Optional target revision id. Omit when switching by strategy name unless the user explicitly asked for a specific version; the newest target revision will be selected.
`strategyId`	No	Target Strategy.id. Use list_strategies to resolve this when the user names a different strategy.
`aiStrategyId`	No	Target AiStrategy.id. Use list_strategies to resolve this when the user names a different strategy.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is structured. The description adds substantive behavior beyond that: the default when revisionId is omitted (newest accessible revision), the precedence of an explicit named target over the current page context, and the fact that files are not transferred. It still does not explain why the operation is destructive or what happens to existing workspace/unsaved state.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then conditions, then the default, then the boundary caveat. It is dense with conditional clauses and the 'explicit' emphasis is repeated across two sentences ('explicitly asks' and 'explicitly names or identifies'), which could be tightened, but every clause carries actionable routing information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a context-mutating tool with three optional parameters, no required fields, and no output schema, the description covers when to invoke, how to resolve the target, what happens by default, and what it does not do. It stops short of describing the resulting state (e.g., what the new active workspace contains or whether prior conversation state is affected), which matters given destructiveHint=true.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline would be 3. The description nevertheless adds meaning beyond the schema: it states the fallback semantics when revisionId is omitted and clarifies how an explicitly named target should be resolved before switching, which complements the schema's pointer to list_strategies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb, resource, and scope: 'Changes this conversation's active strategy workspace to another strategy owned by the user.' It also sets a clear boundary against adjacent capabilities by stating 'This does not copy files by itself; use file tools after switching,' so an agent can distinguish it from clone_strategy or file tools without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly gates invocation: 'Use only when the user explicitly asks to work with, compare against, copy from, or move to a different strategy,' and gives a resolution precedence rule when a different owned strategy is named. It also names the follow-up path ('use file tools after switching'), which routes the agent away from expecting file copies here.

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

All BotSpot: AI Trading, Backtests and Bots 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.