Skip to main content
Glama

Coil Scanner

by trade.coil

get_rotation

Sector and macro ROTATION map: where the money is going. Each of ~50 sector + macro ETFs is scored on its own ratio to SPY versus that ratio's 50-day, and labelled GO (money already here), HOLDING (here but paused), TURNING (money arriving) or OUT (money left), with distance-to-50d %, 20-day slope % and ratio RSI. Macro (gold, energy, bonds, credit, commodities) is covered alongside equity sectors. A state map, not a buy list - see reading: confirmed rotation is LATE for a pullback buyer, and Coil's own engine defers new entries in GO names. Live sibling (x402, pay-per-call): get_rotation_live.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

C2.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It mentions scoring and labeling but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or free of side effects. The lack of any indication of permissions or side effects leaves transparency insufficient.

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

Conciseness1/5

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

The description is overly verbose and includes irrelevant details such as 'Coil's own engine defers new entries' and 'pay-per-call'. It would benefit from a more focused and concise explanation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description explains the metrics and labels but does not specify the output format or structure. Given the lack of an output schema, this omission leaves the tool's return value unclear.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema confirms this. The description does not need to explain parameters, but it also does not explicitly state that no input is required, leaving a minor gap.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states it is a 'Sector and macro ROTATION map: where the money is going.' This conveys the core purpose, but the subsequent jargon about labels and metrics muddies it slightly.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

The description includes confusing references to 'see `reading`', 'Coil's own engine', and 'Live sibling' without clear explanation. It does not effectively guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_rotation_live.

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

All Coil Scanner 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

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most market-data and storefront tools are cleanly scoped, but there is meaningful overlap: get_full_board and get_engine_feed are near-duplicates, get_buy_list overlaps with get_morning_brief's candidate list, and get_orders / get_order_status are identical NotOffered stubs. The free/live twin pairs are clearly labeled so agents can distinguish latency/payment intent, but the sheer number of related reads creates selection friction.

Naming Consistency4/5

The large get_* data family is very predictable (get_stock_read, get_stock_read_live, get_rotation, get_rotation_live), and storefront ools use clear verb_noun actions (add_to_cart, remove_from_cart, save_memory). Minor deviations like checkout_handoff and the get_live_setup / get_live_rules naming (which could be misread as *_live twins) keep it from a perfect score.

Tool Count2/5

46 tools is well abovethe 25+ threshold for a coherent toset; at leat13 are direc live twins of free readable plus a 14-tool storefont/memory subdomain. Many could be consoliated into ingle tools with a delay/live param or a single storefront resource, making the surface feel bloated for agents.

Completeness4/5

The market-data surface is very comphehensive: regime, buy-list, hold-state, rotation, sector, stock, crypto day/night/trend/setups, full board, archived board, changes, and engine-feed coverage leave few dead ends for the stated trading-intelligence purpose. Storefont is adequate but has minor acknowledged gaps—orders/order-status are NotOffered stubs and session memories have no update/delete—so it is not a perfect 5.

Resources