Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

OptionWhales

by io.optionwhales
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Options flow intent rankings

intent_flow_current
Read-onlyIdempotent

Today's options-flow intent rankings: which tickers show bullish vs bearish large-order positioning signals (accumulation, distribution, hedging), with direction bias and strength. Use for 'what does large-order options flow show today?'. Without an account: top 3 tickers (ticker, intent, direction); free: top 3 with core fields; Pro: every tracked ticker with all fields.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "intent_flow_current"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
metaNo
previewNo
sessionNo
rankingsYes
total_tickersNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "meta": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "preview": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "rankings": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "properties": {
+          "coherence_last": {
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "direction_bias": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "intent_label": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "intent_primary": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "momentum_fast": {
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "momentum_slow": {
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "strength_last": {
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "ticker": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "volume_total": {
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "ticker"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "session": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "total_tickers": {
+      "minimum": 0,
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "rankings"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior, so the description is not needed for the safety profile. It adds genuinely useful behavioral context the annotations do not carry: account-tier gating and exactly what fields are returned without an account, on the free tier, and on Pro. It does not discuss data freshness beyond 'today's' or rate limits, so it is a strong 4 rather than a 5.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three sentences, front-loaded with the resource and signal types, then the use case, then the tier table. The tier breakdown is dense but compact and every clause carries information an agent needs. Nothing is repeated from the title or annotations without adding meaning.

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?

Complexity is low: zero parameters and an output schema exists, so return-field documentation is not the description's burden. The description still covers purpose, signal taxonomy, use case, and the tier-dependent field availability that an agent would otherwise have to discover empirically. Nothing material for correct invocation is missing.

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?

This tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to add beyond the schema; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. The description does not need to compensate for any schema coverage gap because the schema is empty by design.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific resource and scope: 'Today's options-flow intent rankings' showing 'bullish vs bearish large-order positioning signals (accumulation, distribution, hedging), with direction bias and strength.' That is far more specific than the title alone and lets an agent distinguish it from a per-ticker directional tool. It stops short of naming a specific sibling to avoid, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It offers a concrete usage cue with the quoted query 'what does large-order options flow show today?' and explains tier-based access, which implies when it is useful. It gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance and never routes the agent to an alternative such as directional_current for single-ticker detail, leaving selection partly to inference.

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

All OptionWhales toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources