Skip to main content
Glama
MissionSquad

MCP Avantage

by MissionSquad

technicalIndicators_midpoint

Calculate midpoint values for financial assets to identify average price levels over specified periods. Use this technical indicator to analyze price trends and support trading decisions.

Instructions

Midpoint over period

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolYesThe stock symbol (e.g., "IBM").
intervalYesTime interval (e.g., "daily", "60min", "weekly"). Check Alpha Vantage docs for valid intervals per indicator.
datatypeNoData format for the response.json
monthNoSpecific month for intraday intervals (YYYY-MM format).
time_periodYesNumber of data points used to calculate the indicator.
series_typeYesThe desired price type.

Implementation Reference

  • The execute handler function for the 'technicalIndicators_midpoint' tool. It calls the shared executeAvantageTool helper, passing the tool name and the specific AVantage library method: av.technicalIndicators.midpoint(params). This is the core logic execution point for the tool.
    execute: (
      args,
      context // Let type be inferred
    ) =>
      executeAvantageTool(
        "technicalIndicators_midpoint",
        args,
        context,
        (av, params) => av.technicalIndicators.midpoint(params)
      ),
  • Zod schema definition for the input parameters of the 'technicalIndicators_midpoint' tool. Extends common params with time_period and series_type.
    export const TechnicalIndicatorsTimeSeriesIndicatorParamsSchema = TechnicalIndicatorsCommonIndicatorParamsSchema.extend({
      time_period: z.string().describe('Number of data points used to calculate the indicator.'), // Using string as AV API expects string
      series_type: SeriesTypeSchema,
    }).describe('Parameters for time series based technical indicators.')
  • src/index.ts:1472-1486 (registration)
    Registration of the 'technicalIndicators_midpoint' MCP tool on the FastMCP server instance.
    server.addTool({
      name: "technicalIndicators_midpoint",
      description: "Midpoint over period",
      parameters: schemas.TechnicalIndicatorsTimeSeriesIndicatorParamsSchema,
      execute: (
        args,
        context // Let type be inferred
      ) =>
        executeAvantageTool(
          "technicalIndicators_midpoint",
          args,
          context,
          (av, params) => av.technicalIndicators.midpoint(params)
        ),
    });
  • Shared helper function used by all AVantage MCP tools, including 'technicalIndicators_midpoint'. Manages authentication, resource pooling of AVantage instances, executes the library method, and handles responses/errors.
    async function executeAvantageTool<TArgs, TResult>(
      toolName: string,
      args: TArgs,
      context: Context<Record<string, unknown> | undefined>, // Use the imported Context type directly
      avantageMethod: (
        av: AVantage,
        args: TArgs
      ) => Promise<{ error?: boolean; reason?: string; data?: TResult }>
    ): Promise<string> {
      logger.info(`Executing '${toolName}' tool for request ID: ${context}`);
      logger.debug(`Args for ${toolName}: ${JSON.stringify(args)}`);
    
      // --- Authentication & Resource Management ---
      // Access extraArgs safely - it might be null or undefined
      const extraArgsApiKey = context.extraArgs?.apiKey as string | undefined;
      const apiKey = extraArgsApiKey || config.apiKey;
    
      if (!apiKey) {
        logger.error(`'${toolName}' failed: Alpha Vantage API key missing.`);
        throw new UserError(apiKeyErrorMessage);
      }
      logger.debug(
        `Using AV API key (source: ${extraArgsApiKey ? "extraArgs" : "environment"}) for ${toolName}`
      );
    
      try {
        // Get or create AVantage instance managed by ResourceManager
        const av = await resourceManager.getResource<AVantage>(
          apiKey, // Cache key is the resolved API key
          "avantage_client", // Type identifier for logging
          async (key) => {
            // Factory Function
            logger.info(
              `Creating new AVantage instance for key ending ...${key.slice(-4)}`
            );
            // AVantage library reads AV_PREMIUM from process.env internally
            return new AVantage(key);
          },
          async (avInstance) => {
            // Cleanup Function (no-op needed for AVantage)
            logger.debug(`Destroying AVantage instance (no-op)`);
          }
        );
    
        // --- Library Call ---
        const result = await avantageMethod(av, args);
    
        // --- Response Handling ---
        if (result.error) {
          logger.warn(
            `'${toolName}' failed. Reason from avantage: ${result.reason}`
          );
          throw new UserError(result.reason || `Tool '${toolName}' failed.`);
        }
    
        if (result.data === undefined || result.data === null) {
          logger.warn(`'${toolName}' completed successfully but returned no data.`);
          return "null"; // Return string "null" for empty data
        }
    
        logger.info(`'${toolName}' completed successfully.`);
        // Stringify the data part of the response
        return JSON.stringify(result.data);
      } catch (error: any) {
        logger.error(
          `Error during execution of '${toolName}': ${error.message}`,
          error
        );
        // If it's already a UserError, rethrow it
        if (error instanceof UserError) {
          throw error;
        }
        // Otherwise, wrap it in a UserError
        throw new UserError(
          `An unexpected error occurred while executing tool '${toolName}': ${error.message}`
        );
      }
    }
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but provides none. It doesn't indicate whether this is a read-only operation, what data source is used (Alpha Vantage), what the output format looks like, whether there are rate limits, or any other behavioral characteristics. The description fails to disclose even basic operational context.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

While technically concise with only three words, this represents under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description doesn't front-load essential information and fails to provide the minimal context needed for tool selection. Every word should earn its place, but here the words don't provide meaningful value.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given this is a technical indicator calculation tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'midpoint' means in financial terms, what the tool returns, how it differs from similar indicators, or any usage context. The description fails to compensate for the lack of structured metadata.

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 the schema already documents all 6 parameters thoroughly with descriptions and enums. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema. According to scoring rules, when schema coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in the description.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'Midpoint over period' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'technicalIndicators_midpoint' without providing meaningful context. It doesn't specify what resource is being acted upon (stock data), what calculation is performed, or how this differs from sibling tools like 'technicalIndicators_midprice' which appears to be a similar technical indicator.

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 provides zero guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of what problem this indicator solves, when it's appropriate versus other technical indicators like SMA or EMA, or any prerequisites for usage. The agent must infer everything from the parameter schema alone.

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/MissionSquad/mcp-avantage'

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