DeltaSignal ATLAS-7

DeltaSignal issuer deep report

deltasignal_issuer_deep_report

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this read-only composite workflow tool for a paid filing-backed issuer drilldown when a daily brief pressure or opportunity row needs causality, not just a headline score. It server-enforces a broad issuer evidence plan: readiness, company_fundamentals, covenant_stress, peer_ranking, alpha_signals, SPECTRA field-map, ATLAS history, ATLAS-7 calculation history, CompanyFacts history, point-in-time history, daily_changes, risk_distribution, and top_stressed rank context. Parameters: ticker is required and normalized to uppercase; source_date, source_date_from, source_date_to, as_of_date_from, as_of_date_to, and output_mode=compact are optional reproduction controls. Behavior: read-only and idempotent; it has no destructive side effects, performs bounded internal fan-out, preserves partial failures, and explicitly reports missing evidence instead of inventing filing, liquidity, covenant, crypto-exposure, market-structure, or scenario facts. Use it for GME-style paid reports that must explain why a CRITICAL stress row exists, what filing evidence supports it, what changed, what peer context says, what historical stress path is available, and which sections still require external or future data.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ticker`	Yes	Required crypto public company ticker. Examples: GME, MSTR, RIOT, MARA, COIN.
`output_mode`	No	Optional response mode. Only compact is accepted in Phase 1.
`source_date`	No	Optional YYYY-MM-DD source date to reproduce one filing/evidence slice where supported.
`as_of_date_to`	No	Optional YYYY-MM-DD upper bound for point-in-time CompanyFacts history.
`source_date_to`	No	Optional YYYY-MM-DD upper bound for ATLAS history and calculation history.
`as_of_date_from`	No	Optional YYYY-MM-DD lower bound for point-in-time CompanyFacts history.
`source_date_from`	No	Optional YYYY-MM-DD lower bound for ATLAS history and calculation history.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	Yes	Server-enforced DeltaSignal issuer deep report evidence bundle with report-readiness contract and missing-evidence matrix.
`provenance`	Yes	Traceability information for the MCP tool response.
`mcp_summary`	Yes	Concise high-signal summary of the tool response. Maximum 140 characters.
`usage_metadata`	No	Performance and estimated cost metadata for this MCP tool call.
`suggested_follow_ups`	Yes	Concrete next MCP calls an agent can run to continue the workflow.

Schema Changelog

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

Changed4 schema fields changedJun 9, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / evidence_sections

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Company-report section availability records. States include available, soft_miss, not_requested, failed_advisory, and failed_closed.",
-  "items": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "description": "Evidence section availability record.",
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "type": "array"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / issuer_evidence_envelope

Removed value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "description": "Company-report evidence envelope with parser-stable sections, availability states, SPECTRA metadata, and non-advice boundary.",
-  "type": "object"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / publication_audit_block

Removed value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "description": "Compact audit block for report publication, including route, evidence hash, section availability summary, SPECTRA state, and daily-change drilldown reference.",
-  "type": "object"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / spectra_metadata

Removed value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "description": "Promoted SPECTRA metadata for company reports, including latest point dates, row counts, current read, risk tier, charge level, and source date bounds when available.",
-  "type": "object"
-}

Changed4 schema fields changedJun 8, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / evidence_sections

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Company-report section availability records. States include available, soft_miss, not_requested, failed_advisory, and failed_closed.",
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "description": "Evidence section availability record.",
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / issuer_evidence_envelope

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Company-report evidence envelope with parser-stable sections, availability states, SPECTRA metadata, and non-advice boundary.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / publication_audit_block

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Compact audit block for report publication, including route, evidence hash, section availability summary, SPECTRA state, and daily-change drilldown reference.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / spectra_metadata

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Promoted SPECTRA metadata for company reports, including latest point dates, row counts, current read, risk tier, charge level, and source date bounds when available.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedMay 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint), the description details internal behavior: 'bounded internal fan-out', 'preserves partial failures', and 'explicitly reports missing evidence instead of inventing... facts'. These traits are not evident from the annotations and provide valuable transparency about execution and error handling.

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?

The description is well-structured into purpose, parameters, behavior, and usage context, with front-loaded intent. It is somewhat long due to the detailed evidence plan list, but each sentence serves a purpose. Minor redundancy exists between the opening usage statement and the final GME-style example, but overall it is efficient for a complex composite tool.

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 tool's complexity (7 parameters, composite workflow, output schema), the description covers when to use, what to expect (missing evidence reporting, partial failure handling), and what questions it answers (why a stress row exists, what changed, peer context, historical path). The output schema handles return structure, so the description is rich enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The description adds context beyond the schema by noting that 'ticker is normalized to uppercase' and that the optional date parameters and output_mode=compact are 'reproduction controls'. This groups the parameters meaningfully and clarifies their collective purpose, though the schema already provides per-parameter descriptions.

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 'read-only composite workflow tool for a paid filing-backed issuer drilldown' and specifies its purpose: to provide causality for daily brief pressure or opportunity rows, not just a headline score. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that likely offer simpler score-based summaries.

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 explicitly says to use this tool 'when a daily brief pressure or opportunity row needs causality' and mentions 'GME-style paid reports' as a concrete use case. However, it does not name alternative tools or provide explicit when-not guidance, though it implies that simpler headline-score tools exist.

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

All DeltaSignal ATLAS-7 tools Inspect

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.

Resources

Need Help?