Skip to main content
Glama

get_market_pulse

Get a weekly snapshot of the municipal primary market, including total par, deal count, top states, sectors, lead managers, and competitive vs negotiated split, built from the live new-issue calendar.

Instructions

Snapshot of this week's muni primary market: total par, deal count, top 5 states, top 5 sectors, top 5 lead managers if available, competitive-vs-negotiated split. Built entirely from the live new-issue calendar — one call, boardroom-ready.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • server.py:746-755 (registration)
    Tool registration for 'get_market_pulse' in the list_tools() function. Defines the tool name, description, and an empty input schema (no parameters needed).
            name="get_market_pulse",
            description=(
                "Snapshot of this week's muni primary market: total par, deal count, "
                "top 5 states, top 5 sectors, top 5 lead managers if available, "
                "competitive-vs-negotiated split. Built entirely from the live "
                "new-issue calendar — one call, boardroom-ready."
            ),
            inputSchema={"type": "object", "properties": {}},
        ),
    ]
  • Handler for 'get_market_pulse' inside the _dispatch() function. Fetches the new-issue calendar, computes total par, top 5 states/sectors, competitive-vs-negotiated split, and tax status mix. Returns a boardroom-ready snapshot of the primary market.
    if name == "get_market_pulse":
        cal = await fetch_calendar()
        rows = cal["all"]
        total_par = sum(float(r.get("_principal_num", "0") or 0) for r in rows)
    
        def _top(fn, n: int = 5) -> list[dict]:
            agg: dict[str, float] = {}
            for r in rows:
                k = fn(r)
                agg[k] = agg.get(k, 0) + float(r.get("_principal_num", "0") or 0)
            return [
                {"name": k, "par_usd": v, "par_formatted": _fmt_amount(v)}
                for k, v in sorted(agg.items(), key=lambda kv: kv[1], reverse=True)[:n]
            ]
    
        comp_cnt = len(cal["competitive"])
        neg_cnt = len(cal["negotiated"])
        return {
            "headline": f"{len(rows)} upcoming deals totaling {_fmt_amount(total_par)}",
            "total_deals": len(rows),
            "total_par_usd": total_par,
            "total_par_formatted": _fmt_amount(total_par),
            "top_states": _top(lambda r: r.get("State", "?")),
            "top_sectors": _top(lambda r: r.get("_sector", "?")),
            "sale_method_mix": {
                "competitive_count": comp_cnt,
                "negotiated_count": neg_cnt,
            },
            "tax_status_mix": _top(lambda r: r.get("Tax Status", "?")),
        }
Behavior3/5

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 states the tool is built from a live calendar, but does not disclose behavioral aspects like performance, caching, or error handling. It mentions 'if available' for lead managers, indicating some data may be missing.

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 extremely concise, using two sentences to convey the content and source. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it enumerates all returned data points (total par, deal count, top states, sectors, lead managers, competitive/negotiated split) and notes conditional availability.

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?

No parameters are defined in the input schema, resulting in 100% schema coverage trivially. The description does not need to add parameter info. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 clearly states the tool provides a snapshot of the week's muni primary market with specific data points like total par, deal count, top states, sectors, and lead managers. It is differentiated from siblings by being a one-call summary, but does not explicitly distinguish from related tools like get_calendar_summary or get_new_issue_calendar.

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 description implies usage as a quick summary tool with 'one call, boardroom-ready', but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor any conditions or exclusions.

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/ark9164-create/blaylock-emma-mcp'

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