Skip to main content
Glama

Central Command — x402 Trading Intelligence

by io.github.tlefko

AI Indicator Creator

cc.indicator_generator
Read-onlyIdempotent

Call cc.indicator_generator — AI-powered indicator workshop. Actions: generate (prompt→code), list_library (user saved indicators), get_indicator (by id), delete_indicator, get_draft (poll generation status), save (persist to library). Returns full indicator code, params, and metadata. Purpose: AI-powered indicator workshop. Actions: generate (prompt→code), list_library (user saved indicators), get_indicator (by id), delete_indicator, get_draft (poll generation status), save (persist to library). Returns full indicator code, params, and metadata. 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: $0.02 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: 10/min (per API key). Tier: premium. Returns: For generation: {success, processing, generation_id}. For list_library: {indicators:[{id, name, description, code, color, is_overlay, params}]}. For get_draft: {draft, status, generation_id}. Guidelines: Pass required parameters exactly; omit unknown fields. On 402, settle payment then retry with X-PAYMENT. Tags: indicator, code-generation, ai, custom, technical-analysis, charting.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
saveNoSet true with indicator_data to persist to library Optional.
actionNolist_library | get_indicator | delete_indicator | get_draft | save. Omit for generation. Optional.
promptNoNatural language description of indicator to generate (required for generation) Optional.
historyNoConversation history for refinement Optional.
timeframeNoChart timeframe context (e.g. 4H, 1D) Optional.
__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.
indicator_idNoUUID of indicator (for get/delete actions) Optional.
indicator_dataNoFull indicator object to save: {name, description, code, color, is_overlay, params} 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

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses that the tool is READ-ONLY with respect to the exchange account, and details auth requirements, cost, rate limits, and HTTP 402 handling. It clearly distinguishes billing from side effects, adding significant context.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, but it repeats the actions list twice, making it redundant. The inclusion of tags and repetitive phrases means some sentences do not earn their place.

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?

The tool is complex with multiple actions and an output schema, but the description covers auth, rate limits, cost, return types, and error handling. It lacks explicit per-action parameter mappings, but the schema and action names make it inferable.

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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for all 8 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra semantic detail, only vaguely referencing 'prompt→code' and generic guidance like 'Pass required parameters exactly'.

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 that this is an 'AI-powered indicator workshop' and enumerates specific actions (generate, list_library, get_indicator, delete_indicator, get_draft, save). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on custom indicator generation rather than market data or strategy execution.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool and lists distinct actions for various use cases. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, so the 'when not to use' guidance is missing.

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