Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SentimentFX

by org.sentimentfx
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_summary

Return daily aggregated news sentiment for ticker over the last days.

Each entry has `avg_sentiment` (unweighted mean of that day's scores),
`article_count`, and a directional `label` (positive / negative /
neutral, thresholded at ±0.1).  `sources="social"` returns a separate
daily average of Reddit, StockTwits and X posts; news and social are
never averaged together.  Costs 1 API credit per day actually returned —
same as GET /v1/summary/{ticker}.  A window with no coverage costs nothing.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "ticker": "<ticker>"
    },
    "name": "get_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNo
tickerYes
sourcesNonews

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / sources
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "news",
+  "enum": [
+    "news",
+    "social"
+  ],
+  "title": "Sources",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the cost model (1 API credit per day actually returned, zero for an uncovered window) and the aggregation rule that news and social are never averaged together. It omits auth requirements, rate limits and pagination behavior, so it falls short of 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by tightly packed field semantics, source behavior and cost. Nearly every sentence earns its place, though the parenthetical reference to the equivalent REST endpoint is slightly redundant and could be dropped.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, yet the description adds the semantics that the schema cannot convey (unweighted mean, ±0.1 label threshold). For a 3-parameter tool with no annotations, the cost disclosure covers the main behavioral risk; auth and pagination remain unstated.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: `days` is defined as the lookback window with a per-day cost implication, `ticker` is identified as the subject, and `sources` is explained as switching between news and a separate social average. It does not restate the `days=30` or `sources=news` defaults, leaving a small gap.

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 opens with a specific verb, resource and scope: 'Return daily aggregated news sentiment for `ticker` over the last `days`.' An agent immediately knows this is a windowed daily-aggregate endpoint. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling `get_sentiment`, so the sibling-routing benefit is missing.

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?

Usage is only implied: the agent can infer this is the daily-rollup tool and that `sources` selects the news vs social stream. There is no explicit 'use this instead of get_sentiment when...' statement and no stated exclusions, so an agent comparing it to `get_sentiment` must guess.

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

All SentimentFX 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