Skip to main content
Glama

Taginfo

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.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Description discloses OAuth requirement, supported types, parameter usage per type, delivery options, and limitations (SMS cap, phone verification). However, the idempotentHint=true annotation may conflict with the 'returns new subscription id' behavior; not explicitly addressed.

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 concise but packed into a single paragraph. Key information is front-loaded, but some line breaks would improve readability. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool complexity (3 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), description is thorough: covers return value, prerequisites, type details, delivery channels, and limitations. Exceptionally complete.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds substantial meaning beyond schema: explains type enum values, params object with per-type examples, delivery object with validation and constraints (SMS, email, webhook).

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 clearly states the tool creates a proactive monitoring subscription to a live-data event stream and returns a subscription id. It distinguishes from siblings like unsubscribe, list_subscriptions, and recent_alerts.

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?

Explicitly mentions when to use and prerequisites (Pipeworx OAuth account, anonymous/BYO cannot persist). Provides details on delivery channels and caps but does not explicitly state when not to use vs alternatives.

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

All Taginfo 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes, e.g., ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are very similar. Also, prediction market tools (bet_research, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, etc.) could be confused. The set lacks clear boundaries between closely related tools.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names are mostly descriptive and use underscores (e.g., ask_pipeworx, entity_profile), but there is no strict pattern. Some are verb_noun (e.g., resolve_entity), others are noun_verb (e.g., key_values) or just nouns (e.g., tag_stats). Mix of styles, but still readable.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is too many for a coherent server. The set covers many domains (OSM, Pipeworx data, memory, subscriptions, prediction markets), making it feel bloated and unfocused. Ideally 3-15 tools for a single-purpose server.

Completeness2/5

The set is comprehensive for Pipeworx data but lacks focus. OSM Taginfo only has 3 tools (no creation/deletion). Prediction markets have many tools but still missing some like cancel trade. The domain is too broad to assess completeness meaningfully.

Resources