Orkid Swap

Macro Pack

sv_macro

Read-only

Federal public-domain macro panels: macro_treasury_yields, macro_funding_conditions, macro_inflation, macro_inflation_expectations, macro_labor_market, market_holidays. Params: panel, start/end YYYY-MM-DD, limit (default 100, max 500). Free with X-ORKID-API-Key or $0.005 USDC/call via x402.

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": "sv_macro"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`end`	No	End date YYYY-MM-DD
`limit`	No	Max rows, default 100, cap 500
`panel`	No	Panel to query (default first). Available: macro_treasury_yields, macro_funding_conditions, macro_inflation, macro_inflation_expectations, macro_labor_market, market_holidays
`start`	No	Start date YYYY-MM-DD

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond them, namely authentication and pricing (X-ORKID-API-Key or $0.005 USDC per call via x402), which an agent needs before invoking. However, it says nothing about return format, pagination beyond the row cap, or the default panel selection behavior beyond the schema note.

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?

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with the resource and panel enumeration, followed by parameters and access terms. It is appropriately sized, though the panel list is duplicated verbatim from the schema and could have been omitted to save space.

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

Completeness3/5

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

There is no output schema, so the description should ideally convey what a panel record looks like or at least that rows are returned per panel, and it does not. With annotations covering safety and schema covering all parameters, the definition is workable but leaves the return-value shape entirely unspecified for a data-retrieval tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the input schema, including the panel enum values and the limit default/cap. The description merely restates the panel list and the YYYY-MM-DD format, adding little new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific resource (federal public-domain macro panels) and enumerates the concrete panel names, so an agent knows exactly what data it can retrieve. It does not differentiate from any sibling tool, but the sibling list (filings, futures, vectors, quotes) is largely disjoint, making the scope unambiguous in practice.

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 description lists panels and date parameters but never says when to choose this tool over siblings or when it is inappropriate. An agent can infer 'call this to fetch macro panel rows,' but there is no explicit context or exclusion guidance.

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

All Orkid Swap tools Inspect

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

Need Help?