Regime

Calendar check

calendar_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

'Uptober'. 'Mondays dip'. 'Sell in May'. Any calendar claim on 34 coins, measured against chance. With seven days one has to come first, so the answer is a permutation test: the SAME returns dealt out at random hundreds of times, and how often chance alone produces a bucket that good. Plus how many times the bucket really happened - October is 279 days of bitcoin but nine Octobers - and the round-trip cost. Nine years of daily candles.

Tests whether one day of the week, month of the year or hour of the day really beats the rest for a coin. Use for seasonality claims (Uptober, Monday dips, Sell in May). For the claim about missing the market's best days use best_days_check; for when to spread an entry, averaging_in_check.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`coin`	Yes	Ticker or full pair. An unknown one comes back with the list we hold and the ones left out.
`calendar`	Yes	day_of_week, month_of_year or hour_of_day. The hourly one exists for the 16 coins we hold hourly candles for.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	No	false when we do not hold that data. Never a zero standing in for an answer.
`page`	No	The page with these exact numbers already in.
`error`	No	no_data when ok is false.
`model`	No	The test, stated, including why a monthly p-value flatters itself.
`reason`	No	Why, in one sentence, and what we do have instead.
`source`	No	The public file these numbers come from.
`buckets`	No	Every bucket: its name, observations, times occurred, mean, median and share of up days.
`history`	No	From, to, days held and which tape.
`shuffles`	No	How many shuffled worlds were tested.
`best_bucket`	No	The best bucket by average move, named.
`try_instead`	No	When ok is false: the closest call that does answer, ready to send (tool, arguments, and what changed).
`observations`	No	Moves measured across all buckets.
`same_coin_in`	No	When ok is false because this tool lacks the coin: the other tools that hold it, each with arguments ready to send.
`worst_bucket`	No	The other end.
`best_mean_pct`	No	Its average move. On its own, this is the advertisement.
`worst_mean_pct`	No	Its average move.
`edge_covers_cost`	No	Whether the average move of the best bucket is bigger than that cost. Usually it is not.
`chance_best_p95_pct`	No	What chance reaches in one shuffle out of twenty.
`round_trip_cost_pct`	No	What entering and exiting once costs, so the edge can be compared with it.
`beats_chance_at_5pct`	No	Whether that share is under 0.05. Across all 34 coins, about 5% of these come back true by chance alone, so one true answer on its own is not a finding.
`chance_best_mean_pct`	No	What the BEST bucket of a shuffled world averages. Anything below this is less impressive than nothing.
`chance_matches_it_share`	No	The p-value: share of shuffles whose best bucket matched or beat the real one. High means no pattern.
`best_bucket_happened_times`	No	How many times that bucket has actually occurred. For months this is years, not days: nine Octobers is nine observations however many candles they hold, and it is the number these claims never show.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 15, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "calendar": "month_of_year",
+    "coin": "btc"
+  }
+]

addedOutput schema / properties / same_coin_in

Added value: +{
+  "description": "When ok is false because this tool lacks the coin: the other tools that hold it, each with arguments ready to send.",
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / try_instead

Added value: +{
+  "description": "When ok is false: the closest call that does answer, ready to send (tool, arguments, and what changed).",
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedOct 2, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / calendar / enum
```
Added value: +[
+  "day_of_week",
+  "month_of_year",
+  "hour_of_day"
+]
```
First observedOct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's burden is lower. It still adds real substance beyond them: the permutation-test methodology, the small-sample caveat ('nine Octobers'), inclusion of round-trip cost, and the nine-year daily-candle data span. Only the runtime cost of hundreds of resamples is undisclosed.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The opening ('Uptober. Mondays dip. Sell in May.') is ornamental and the sample-size aside ('279 days of bitcoin but nine Octobers') is dense prose that could be plainer. The substantive content is real, but it is spread across two paragraphs with some redundancy between them.

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 no explanation, and annotations carry the safety profile. The description supplies methodology and data-scope context adequate for correct invocation; what is missing is only peripheral (determinism, expected computation latency) for a resampling-based tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so 3 is the baseline; the description earns above it by adding meaning the schema lacks, namely the coin universe size ('34 coins'), unknown-ticker fallback behavior, and the constraint that 'hour_of_day' exists only for the 16 hourly-candle coins.

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 second paragraph states a precise verb and resource: 'Tests whether one day of the week, month of the year or hour of the day really beats the rest for a coin.' It also names the sibling tools it is not (best_days_check, averaging_in_check), so an agent can route without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit when-to-use ('Use for seasonality claims (Uptober, Monday dips, Sell in May)') plus two named alternatives with their selecting conditions. Nothing is left to inference.

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

All Regime 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?