TickerRisk MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

find_wheel_candidates

Find cash-secured put candidates for wheel strategies, filtering out S&P 500 stocks with earnings, FDA, or legal catalysts inside the option expiry window.

Instructions

Find cash-secured put candidates (the wheel strategy) that have no hidden catalyst in the expiry window.

Use this when someone asks what puts to sell this week, for wheel or cash-secured-put ideas, for "safe premium" to collect, or which stocks pay well without an earnings report coming up.

Scans the whole S&P 500 and returns only names whose catalyst-risk score over the option's own expiry window is under max_risk — so candidates with earnings, FDA decisions or legal events inside the window are filtered out rather than surfaced as fake high-yield opportunities.

Args: week: Expiry bucket — "this" (1-7 days), "next" (8-14), "two", "three", "month" (1-35), or "all" (up to 45 days). "all" returns the most results. risk: How close to the money to sell — "conservative" (~0.20 delta, further out, safer), "balanced" (~0.30), or "aggressive" (~0.40, more premium, more assignment risk). max_risk: Maximum catalyst-risk score to allow, 0-100. 55 is a sensible default; lower it to 40 for a stricter list. min_put_oi: Minimum put open interest, to keep results actually tradeable. Keep at 100 during market hours. sector: Optional GICS sector filter, e.g. "Technology", "Health Care", "Financials". Empty means all sectors. limit: How many candidates to return (1-25).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`risk`	No	balanced
`week`	No	all
`limit`	No
`sector`	No
`max_risk`	No
`min_put_oi`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.3Sep 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the scan covers the whole S&P 500, that results are pre-filtered by catalyst-risk score against the option's own expiry window, and why risky names are excluded rather than surfaced. It omits any note on auth, rate limits, or runtime cost of a full-index scan.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and the key differentiator before the usage triggers and arg docs. Slightly long, but each paragraph earns its place; the arg entries are structured rather than padded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. Given a 6-param tool with no annotations and no schema descriptions, the description supplies everything an agent needs to call it correctly: intent, filtering behavior, and per-parameter semantics.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and there are 6 parameters, so this had to compensate fully — and it does. Every parameter gains meaning the schema lacks: week buckets with day ranges and the note that 'all' returns most results, risk levels with delta anchors, a default and tuning hint for max_risk, and a market-hours instruction for min_put_oi, plus a valid range for limit.

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 ('Find cash-secured put candidates (the wheel strategy)') plus a critical scope qualifier ('no hidden catalyst in the expiry window'). The catalyst-filter distinction separates it from the covered-call sibling and from generic screeners without requiring a schema read.

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?

Gives concrete trigger phrases ('what puts to sell this week', 'safe premium', 'stocks pay well without an earnings report coming up'), which maps cleanly onto user intent. It does not explicitly name find_covered_calls as the alternative for the exit half of the wheel, so there is no stated when-not.

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

Deploy Server