Seiche — Funding and FX Evidence

Summarize cross-market conditions and coverage

world_markets_context

Read-onlyIdempotent

Summarize cross-market funding, FX, macro-capital, and China evidence when a question spans markets or scope is unclear; start with the compact summary, then open a relevant section.

Instructions

Summarize the available money-market, FX, macro-capital and China evidence when a question spans markets or its scope is not yet clear. Start with section='summary', then select a relevant section. For detailed funding metrics use money_market_context; for dated FX/accepted China observations use market_workbench; for external dataset discovery use research_network. This chartless overview is not a time-series query. It projects only completed/public state into money_markets, forex, macro-capital transmission, China macro evidence, official references, methodology, or a compact summary. Every response carries snapshot/as-of clocks, canonical Seiche citation URLs, and explicit observed, derived, structural, restricted, and unavailable boundaries. The China structural catalog is unsigned; only status=restricted represents a verified Seiche owner-attested revision; both states keep NBS values, raw evidence, and history withheld. A separately operator-accepted economic_context may publish licensed World Bank WDI values with annual/structural freshness, distinct release, Palimpsest collection, and Seiche acceptance clocks. Those values are context only and never a live print, score, gauge, forecast, or signal. The sources selector is reference-only; use all when verified China context and its NBS source linkage must appear together. Coverage is curated and partial rather than exhaustive or uniformly live. It never triggers collection, repository history reads, or model fitting. Its named-field whitelist omits chart and history arrays for data minimization; that is not a per-record licensing audit. Capital coverage is limited to public positioning proxies, Treasury primary-market absorption, market stress, official liquidity and global dollar credit—not a security master, issuer-data service or consolidated tape. Use Undertow instead when the question is specifically about executable depth, liquidity-provider concentration, or position-sized exit cost.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`section`	No	Projection to return; defaults to the compact cross-market summary.	summary

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	No
`as_of`	No
`forex`	No
`scope`	No
`clocks`	No
`reason`	No
`schema`	No
`status`	No
`sources`	No
`summary`	No
`category`	No
`citation`	No
`coverage`	No
`selection`	No
`disclaimer`	No
`china_macro`	No	Metadata-only NBS catalog. Structural is an unsigned code-owned catalog; restricted means a Seiche owner-attested revision was verified. A separate optional economic_context contains only operator-accepted annual World Bank WDI observations and remains ineligible for scores and gauges.
`methodology`	No
`context_only`	No
`generated_at`	No
`money_markets`	No
`canonical_urls`	No
`capital_markets`	No
`status_definitions`	No
`available_selectors`	No
`chart_history_included`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.16.5Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, but the description adds substantial context: it never triggers collection, history reads, or model fitting; it carries snapshot/as-of clocks and citation URLs; the China structural catalog is unsigned and only status=restricted is owner-attested; NBS values and history are withheld; and capital coverage is explicitly bounded. This is rich disclosure well beyond the structured hints.

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 purpose and usage in the first two sentences, with routing and boundaries following. Every sentence carries information, but the middle section is dense with licensing/clock/WDI minutiae that an agent selecting (not interpreting) the tool could skim, so it is slightly over-full rather than wasteful.

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 not be explained, and the description still covers coverage limits, data-minimization whitelist, confidentiality boundaries, and sibling exclusions. For a multi-section overview tool with a single optional enum parameter, nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine selection semantics: default to section='summary', then pick a relevant section, and 'sources is reference-only; use all when verified China context and its NBS source linkage must appear together.' That is meaningful guidance the enum description alone does not provide.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Summarize the available money-market, FX, macro-capital and China evidence' for cross-market or ambiguous-scope questions. It explicitly distinguishes itself from named siblings (money_market_context, market_workbench, research_network, Undertow), so an agent can route without opening schemas.

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 explicit when-to-use ('question spans markets or its scope is not yet clear') and a recommended entry sequence ('Start with section=summary'). It names three alternatives with the exact conditions that select each, plus a fourth (Undertow) for executable-depth/liquidity questions, so when-not-to-use is also covered.

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

Deploy Server