Skip to main content
Glama
AmyYingTang

mcp-news-briefing

by AmyYingTang

briefing_stock_alert_trigger

Avoid duplicate stock alerts by recording triggers, checking recent history for similar events, and appending duplicates or confirming updates.

Instructions

记录预警触发 + 事件级去重。在 briefing_stock_digest 分析过程中发现新闻命中 alert 时调用。

流程:

  1. 从新闻中提取事件日期(event_date,事件本身发生的日期,非新闻发布日期)和事件摘要(summary)

  2. 调用此工具,server 会检查 trigger_history 中是否有日期相近(±3天)的已触发记录

  3. 如果返回 near_date_found + near_entries:

    • 比对新闻内容与已有 event_signature

    • 语义相同(同一事件重复报道)→ 再次调用此工具,action='append_duplicate'

    • 有实质性进展(传闻→官方确认等)→ 再次调用此工具,action='confirm',is_update=true

    • 不同事件 → 再次调用此工具,action='confirm',is_update=false

  4. 如果返回 new_trigger → 已自动记录,无需额外操作

触发通知的语气:

  • 说"你设定的预警条件匹配到了以下新闻",不说"你担心的事情出现了新进展"

  • 说"以下是相关来源的信息",不说"经查证,该消息基本属实"

  • 事件更新用 ⚠️🔄 标注,附上"此前已有相关预警,本次为事件进展"

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenNo用户token或用户名。留空则自动使用默认身份。
actionNocheck=首次检查去重(默认),confirm=Claude确认为新事件后写入,append_duplicate=追加重复来源check
alert_idsYes被触发的预警ID列表
is_updateNo是否为已有事件的实质性进展(默认 false)
source_urlNo触发来源文章 URL
event_signatureNo事件签名,用于去重。首次调用时必填。
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It thoroughly discloses the tool's internal dedup logic (checks trigger_history for dates within ±3 days), the possible return states (near_date_found + near_entries vs new_trigger), and the expected follow-up actions. It even includes notification tone guidelines, providing rich behavioral context beyond a basic API description.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is long but structured as a numbered list of steps, each sentence earning its place. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then flows naturally into usage. No filler or redundant content; every detail supports the tool's complex dedup behavior.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description explicitly enumerates the possible return values (near_date_found + near_entries, new_trigger) and prescribes how to handle each. It also covers parameter semantics, workflow, and even stylistic guidance for notifications, making the description fully self-sufficient for correct invocation.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful workflow context: it explains that event_date is the date the event actually occurred (not the publication date), that event_signature is required on first call, and it interprets the action enum values. This goes beyond the schema's field-level 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 opens with a clear statement of the tool's function: '记录预警触发 + 事件级去重' (record alert trigger + event-level dedup). It also specifies the precise context for invocation: during briefing_stock_digest analysis when a news item matches an alert. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like briefing_stock_alert_set or briefing_stock_alert_update.

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?

The description provides explicit usage context ('在 briefing_stock_digest 分析过程中发现新闻命中 alert 时调用') and a detailed step-by-step workflow explaining how to react to different return values, including the decision to append_duplicate or confirm. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternative tools, so it stops short of a perfect 5.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AmyYingTang/mcp-news-briefing'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server