Skip to main content
Glama

Hts

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Subscribe to Alerts

subscribe
Idempotent

Create a proactive monitoring subscription to a live-data event stream. Returns the new subscription id. Requires a Pipeworx OAuth account (anonymous + BYO cannot persist subscriptions). Supported types: "sec_8k" (8-K filings matching ticker + item codes — e.g. items:["5.02"] = officer change), "polymarket_edge" (Polymarket↔Kalshi cross-venue mispricings — params:{topic:"fed"}), "fred_series" (new FRED observations — params:{series_id:"UNRATE"}). Delivery channels: feed (always on — pull via recent_alerts or GET registry.pipeworx.io/alerts.json), and optionally email (set delivery:{email:"you@x.com"}) or sms (delivery:{sms:"+15551234567"} — phone must be verified at /account first; 10/day cap).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesSubscription type.
paramsYesType-specific filter. sec_8k: {ticker:"AAPL", items?:["5.02","1.01"]}. polymarket_edge: {topic:"fed", min_spread_bps?:500}. fred_series: {series_id:"UNRATE"}. patent_grant: {applicant:"Apple Inc."}. clinical_trial: {sponsor?:"Pfizer", condition?:"lung cancer", phase?:"PHASE3"} (sponsor or condition required).
deliveryNoOptional delivery channels in addition to the always-on persistent feed. {email:"you@x.com"} sends a templated alert per fired event. {sms:"+15551234567"} sends an SMS per event — must match the verified phone on the caller's account (verify at https://pipeworx.io/account first; 10/day cap). {webhook:"https://..."} POSTs each event JSON to your endpoint, HMAC-signed — the response includes delivery.webhook_secret (whsec_…) ONCE; verify X-Pipeworx-Signature = sha256 HMAC of "<X-Pipeworx-Timestamp>.<raw body>". Auto-disabled after 10 consecutive failing runs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; description adds substantial behavioral context: requires OAuth (anonymous/BYO cannot persist), phone verification, 10/day SMS cap, webhook HMAC signing and one-time secret, auto-disable after 10 failing runs. This far exceeds the annotations' minimal information.

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?

Description is a dense paragraph but front-loaded with purpose and return value. While lengthy, every sentence provides useful detail (auth, types, delivery, limits). Could be improved with bullet structure, but content justifies its length.

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?

Without an output schema, the description explicitly covers the returned subscription id, all supported types, parameter examples, delivery channels, auth prerequisites, and behavioral limits. It's complete for a relatively complex subscription creation tool.

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% with rich descriptions embedded. The description adds interpretive meaning beyond the schema, e.g. items:['5.02'] = officer change, and clarifies optional delivery object semantics with examples. It doesn't fully replicate nested schema, but schema already carries the structure.

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?

Description opens with 'Create a proactive monitoring subscription to a live-data event stream. Returns the new subscription id' — a specific verb+resource+outcome. It clearly distinguishes from siblings list_subscriptions/unsubscribe by focusing on creation and provisioning of delivery channels.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides clear context: OAuth requirement, supported subscription types, delivery channels, and mentions pulling via recent_alerts as an alternative to the feed. However, it doesn't explicitly name list_subscriptions or unsubscribe as alternatives for managing existing subscriptions, nor state when not to use this tool.

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

All Hts 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools overlap heavily: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all route questions to the same 5,529-tool catalog, with ask_pipeworx_beta currently identical to ask_pipeworx. The Polymarket suite also has ambiguous boundaries (bet_research vs. polymarket_edges vs. polymarket_arbitrage), and scan_competitor_ai_presence simply wraps ai_visibility_check, so agents may struggle to choose the right tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case and readable, but the set mixes verb-led names (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, scan_dependency, validate_claim, hts_search) with noun-led names (entity_profile, recent_alerts, polymarket_edges, ai_visibility_check). Variant suffixes like ask_pipeworx_beta / ask_pipeworx_grounded add further inconsistency, so the naming is coherent enough but not predictable enough for a 4.

Tool Count2/5

At 33 tools, the server exceeds the 25-tool threshold for 'too many' in the rubric. Even though the broad data-research scope justifies a larger surface, the count feels bloated because several tools are near-duplicates (e.g., ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) or wrappers (scan_competitor_ai_presence), making the set heavier than necessary.

Completeness4/5

The server covers its core domains thoroughly: data querying (ask_pipeworx family, deep_research), entity resolution and comparison (resolve_entity, entity_profile, compare_entities), verification (validate_claim, ask_pipeworx_grounded), HTS tariff lookup (search + detail), subscription lifecycle (subscribe/unsubscribe/list/recent_alerts), and memory (remember/recall/forget). Minor gaps exist, such as no subscription-update endpoint and no generic raw-source export, but these are workaround-able and do not cause agent failures.

Resources