Skip to main content
Glama

Central Command — x402 Trading Intelligence

by io.github.tlefko

Technical Analysis Toolbox

cc.data_tools
Read-onlyIdempotent

Call cc.data_tools — Comprehensive TA computation engine: 25+ indicators (SMA, EMA, RSI, MACD, ATR, Bollinger, Stochastic, ADX, CCI, Ichimoku, VWAP, Volume Profile, Fibonacci, Pivots, etc.) on any OHLCV data. Purpose: Comprehensive TA computation engine: 25+ indicators (SMA, EMA, RSI, MACD, ATR, Bollinger, Stochastic, ADX, CCI, Ichimoku, VWAP, Volume Profile, Fibonacci, Pivots, etc.) on any OHLCV data. Behavior: READ-ONLY. Does not place orders, move funds, or mutate your exchange account. Live / near-real-time data. Auth: X-Api-Key or x402 payment proof (X-PAYMENT / __x_payment). Anonymous unauthenticated calls receive HTTP 402 with payment accepts. Cost: $0.005 USDC per successful call (x402 Base USDC pay-per-use or prepaid X-Api-Key balance). Linked Connect keys are free. This is billing, not a side effect. Rate limit: 30/min (per API key). Tier: standard. Returns: Full indicator suite output for all requested tools: computed values, signals, divergences, and crossovers at every data point. Guidelines: Compute / parse / backtest only — no live orders. Feed outputs into cc.agent_strategy with force_paper=true to paper-trade. Tags: indicators, technical-analysis, computation, rsi, macd, bollinger, ichimoku, fibonacci.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolYesParameter `symbol` (string). Required.
candlesNoProvide your own OHLCV data instead of fetching Optional.
timeframeYesParameter `timeframe` (string). Required.
indicatorsYesList of indicators to compute Required.
__x_paymentNoOptional x402 payment proof (same value as X-PAYMENT header). Use when retrying after HTTP 402 if your MCP client cannot set custom headers. Not a business parameter. Optional.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesTrue when the gateway HTTP status is 2xx.
dataNoParsed JSON body from the endpoint (shape varies by slug).
errorNoError message when ok is false.
statusYesUpstream HTTP status from x402-gateway.
billingNoOptional payment / cost metadata when present.
endpointYesCatalog slug that was invoked (e.g. funding-rates).

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: cost per call, rate limits, authentication methods, and the HTTP 402 response for anonymous calls. It also clarifies that billing is not a side effect, which goes beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with labeled sections (Purpose, Behavior, Auth, etc.), but it contains redundancy: the opening sentence is nearly identical to the 'Purpose' field, and the 'Tags' section repeats indicator names. It is longer than necessary, though the structure helps navigability.

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 complexity (25+ indicators, auth, cost, rate limits, return values), the description is remarkably complete. It covers authentication, pricing, rate limiting, read-only behavior, return format, and integration guidance. The output schema is present, so return details are not required, but the description still summarizes outputs effectively.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by enumerating example indicator values and mentioning that users can provide their own OHLCV data via the 'candles' parameter, but it does not deeply explain parameter interactions or formats beyond that.

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 clearly states the tool is a comprehensive technical analysis computation engine supporting 25+ indicators on OHLCV data. It distinguishes itself from sibling data tools by explicitly naming its function (compute indicators) and scope (any OHLCV data), making its purpose unmistakable.

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?

It provides clear usage context: compute/parse/backtest only, no live orders, and explicitly suggests feeding outputs into cc.agent_strategy for paper trading. It does not enumerate alternatives directly, but the mention of the downstream sibling and the 'no live orders' exclusion gives practical guidance.

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

All Central Command — x402 Trading Intelligence 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping or unclear boundaries. The AI chat tools cc.squirrel_chat, cc.squirrel_chat_v2, and cc.openclaw_chat all provide conversational trading assistance with near-identical descriptions, while cc.central_signal and cc.external_signal both normalize signals for execution. Additionally, cc.asset_scanner, cc.auto_fetch_market_data, cc.data_tools, and cc.ma_fetch all supply technical indicator data with significant overlap.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools share the 'cc.' prefix and use snake_case consistently, which creates a uniform feel. However, naming style mixes nouns (cc.asset_scanner, cc.data_tools) with verbs (cc.auto_fetch, cc.list_catalog) and compound forms (cc.strategy_backtest, cc.trade_builder), so it is not a strict verb_noun pattern. Minor deviations keep it from a 5.

Tool Count2/5

With 33 tools, the server is well beyond the typical well-scoped range of 3-15 and even above the 'heavy' 16-25 range. While the trading intelligence domain can be broad, this count feels overstuffed rather than curated, especially given the many overlapping data and AI tools.

Completeness3/5

The core trading workflow is covered: market data, technical analysis, signals, strategy backtesting, paper trading, and live execution all have tools. However, there is no dedicated account management tool (e.g., get_balance, list_positions) and no explicit delete_strategy, with these operations buried inside cc.agent_strategy's action parameter. Notable gaps remain for a complete lifecycle.

Resources