canli-validation-mcp

Summarize a price or return series

summarize_series

Read-onlyIdempotent

Summarizes long price or return series into growth, risk, drawdown, trend, volatility, tail, jump, and stale-data fields instead of reading raw bars.

Instructions

A long price or return series in about 100 words plus fields: growth, risk, dated drawdowns, trend, volatility regime, tails, jumps, stale data. Use instead of reading raw bars. Nothing here is a forecast or advice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Label for the text.
`dates`	No	Optional ISO dates, one per value.
`prices`	No	Prices, oldest first; or returns, or series_file.
`returns`	No	Returns as fractions, oldest first.
`series_file`	No	CSV or JSON of prices or returns on this machine; local server only.
`series_kind`	No	series_file holds; default prices.
`series_column`	No	Column name or 1-based position.
`periods_per_year`	No	252 daily (default), 365 crypto, 52 weekly, 12 monthly.
`benchmark_returns`	No	Same-period benchmark returns; adds beta.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`risk`	No
`text`	No
`jumps`	No
`tails`	No
`trend`	No
`growth`	No
`limits`	No
`source`	No
`drawdown`	No
`volatility`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed10 schema fields changedv0.13.0Oct 7, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / series_column / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
-    "minimum": -9007199254740991,
-    "type": "integer"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  }
+]

removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
removedOutput schema / properties / drawdown / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
removedOutput schema / properties / growth / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
removedOutput schema / properties / jumps / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
removedOutput schema / properties / risk / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
removedOutput schema / properties / source / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
removedOutput schema / properties / tails / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
removedOutput schema / properties / trend / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -{}
```

changedOutput schema / properties / volatility / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": {},
-    "properties": {},
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "properties": {},
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

Addedv0.12.0Oct 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: the output is roughly 100 words plus named fields, and it explicitly scopes the tool by stating it is 'not a forecast or advice' — a useful boundary that annotations cannot express.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose before the output inventory and the disclaimer. The first sentence is a fragment ('A long price or return series in about 100 words'), which is slightly compressed but costs nothing in clarity.

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 not be described, yet the description still names the output fields helpfully. All 9 parameters are documented in-schema and annotations carry the safety profile, leaving only the absence of usage routing as a minor gap.

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% across all 9 parameters, so the schema already documents prices vs returns vs series_file, periods_per_year conventions and benchmark_returns. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the generic 'price or return series' phrasing, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific verb (summarize) and resource (a long price or return series), and enumerates the output content (growth, risk, drawdowns, trend, volatility regime, tails, jumps, stale data). It is clearly distinguishable from the validation/backtest siblings, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The line 'Use instead of reading raw bars' gives a directional when-to-use hint, which is more than nothing. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. minimum series length), and no routing between this and the backtest/validation siblings.

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