Skip to main content
Glama
BijectiveLabs

trading-research-agents

Official
by BijectiveLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Check a pre-registration (layer 3)

check_registration
Read-only

Read a sealed pre-registration to inspect the hypothesis, universe, power analysis, and kill criteria before validating trades, and verify the seal still matches the file.

Instructions

Read a sealed pre-registration: its hypothesis, universe, power and kill criteria.

Use it before `validate_trades`, to see what a validation will be judged against, or to
confirm that a registration has not been edited since it was sealed: the seal is recomputed
from the file. Read-only. Returns the name, the seal, the horizon, the instruments, the sample
the power analysis requires, each kill criterion (metric, comparison, threshold, verdict) and
the registration it amends, if any. A file that does not parse is refused with the reason.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
registration_pathYespath to a preregistration.json

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / registration_path / description
      Added value: +"path to a preregistration.json"
  2. First observedv0.7.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond that: the seal is recomputed from the file (an integrity check, not a cached value), and a file that fails to parse is refused with the reason rather than returning partial data. It does not discuss permissions or limits, but for a local read tool that is a minor omission.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the sequencing guidance and the failure mode. Every clause carries information; the return-field list is the only slightly padded part but it still earns its place by framing what a caller receives.

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?

With annotations covering safety and an output schema covering return shape, the description only needs to supply placement in the workflow and edge-case behavior, both of which it does. The enumeration of return fields is partly redundant against the output schema, and no guidance is given about what to do when the integrity check fails, which keeps it short of a 5.

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% for the single parameter, and the schema already states it is a path to a preregistration.json. The description adds no format, default, or path-resolution detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read a sealed pre-registration') and immediately names the sibling it relates to (validate_trades), so an agent can place it in the workflow without opening either schema. The scope is further sharpened by naming the artifacts read (hypothesis, universe, power, kill criteria).

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?

Gives two explicit when-to-use conditions: before running validate_trades to see what a validation is judged against, and to confirm a registration was not edited since sealing. It names the alternative tool and the condition that selects this one over it, leaving nothing to inference.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools