onikora FIX Parser
Server Details
Remote MCP server for parsing FIX messages into UFO, FFE, and sequence outputs.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- onikora/mcp-registry
- GitHub Stars
- 0
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.2/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools are clearly distinguished: one for a single FIX message, one for multiple messages. However, their descriptions are very similar, causing slight ambiguity if the agent doesn't notice the plural.
The naming follows a consistent pattern: parse_fix_message and parse_fix_messages, varying only by singular/plural. This is predictable and clear.
With only 2 tools, the server is minimal but well-scoped for its purpose of parsing FIX messages. It covers the core need without unnecessary extras.
The server provides tools for both single and batch parsing of FIX messages, covering the primary use cases. No obvious gaps for a simple parser, though more advanced features like streaming or validation are missing.
Available Tools
2 toolsparse_fix_messageParse FIX MessageAInspect
Use this tool whenever you see one raw FIX message string, typically starting with 8=FIX. The input may use pipe (|) or SOH separators. By default it returns only the human-readable hierarchical output. Set type=tags to return only the hierarchical FIX field/tag view.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| type | No | Optional override for single-message parsing. Omit it to return the default human-readable output. Use "tags" to return the hierarchical FIX field/tag output only. | |
| raw_message | Yes | The raw FIX message. The tool accepts either pipe separators or SOH separators. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided; description adds input format acceptance (pipe or SOH separators) and output options (default human-readable vs. tags). Does not cover error handling or performance implications, but is adequate for a parsing tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences with no redundancy; the key use case is front-loaded, and every sentence adds necessary information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given low complexity (2 parameters, no output schema), description explains input formats and output types sufficiently. Lacks error handling notes but is largely complete for typical usage.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%; description adds value by explaining the effect of the 'type' parameter (returns hierarchical tag view) and confirming input format flexibility beyond schema descriptions.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'parse' and resource 'FIX message', and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'parse_fix_messages' by specifying 'one raw FIX message string'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly says when to use the tool ('whenever you see one raw FIX message string'), describes input format and optional type parameter. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives to siblings, but the sibling name implies handling multiple messages.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
parse_fix_messagesParse FIX MessagesAInspect
Use this tool whenever you see multiple raw FIX messages that need to be parsed in order. Each message typically starts with 8=FIX and may use pipe (|) or SOH separators. Returns ordered Onikora UFO, FFO, and optional sequence output.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| outputs | No | Optional outputs to include. Defaults to ["ufo", "ffo"]. "ufo" is the human-readable hierarchical output. "ffo" is the hierarchical FIX field/tag output. "sequence" is the ordered sequence-row view. | |
| messages | Yes | Ordered list of raw FIX messages. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, description must cover behavior. It mentions input format ('8=FIX, pipe or SOH separators') and output types ('ordered Onikura UFO, FFE, and optional sequence'). However, lacks details on error handling or ordering guarantees beyond 'ordered'.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with usage guidance. Second sentence adds necessary details. No redundant or superfluous text. Highly concise.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no annotations or output schema, the description covers input format, output types, and ordering. Missing potential error handling details but adequate for agent selection. Sibling contrasting would improve, but not required.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% (both params documented). Description adds value by clarifying that messages start with '8=FIX' and separator options, and for outputs it reiterates the enum meanings. Exceeds baseline of 3 by providing extra context.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly specifies the verb 'parse' and resource 'multiple raw FIX messages', distinguishing it from sibling 'parse_fix_message' which handles single messages. Purpose is unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly states when to use: 'whenever you see multiple raw FIX messages that need to be parsed in order'. No explicit when-not-to-use, but the sibling name implies alternative. Good but could be more explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!