TradingAgents MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

options_strategy

Price options positions from the live chain and compute payoff at expiry: net debit/credit, max profit/loss, breakevens, probability of profit, and net delta.

Instructions

Price an options position from the live chain and compute its payoff at expiry in code: net debit/credit, max profit, max loss, breakevens, probability of profit and net delta. Use it for every structure you propose; never do this math yourself.

legs: list of {"type": "call"|"put"|"stock", "side": "buy"|"sell", "strike": number (options), "expiry": "YYYY-MM-DD" (options), "quantity": contracts for options or shares for stock (default 1), "price": optional per-share override}. All option legs must share one expiry. Examples: covered call = buy 100 stock + sell 1 call; bull call spread = buy call K1 + sell call K2; cash-secured put = sell 1 put. Prices default to the mid quote (else last trade).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "ticker": "<ticker>",
      "legs": "<legs>"
    },
    "name": "options_strategy"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`legs`	Yes
`as_of`	No
`ticker`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Nov 7, 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 still discloses key behavior: math runs 'in code', prices default to the mid quote falling back to the last trade, and all option legs must share one expiry. It stops short of saying what happens on constraint violation (error vs silent handling) or that it is a pure, non-mutating computation, which matters given zero annotation coverage.

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?

Front-loaded with the outcome and the directive, then a compact structured block for legs with concrete examples. Every sentence carries information; nothing is filler.

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 is present, so return values need not be re-explained, and the description fully covers the only non-trivial input. It also states the cross-leg expiry constraint that an agent must satisfy to call correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden — and it does so thoroughly for the complex `legs` parameter: key names, allowed type/side values, strike/expiry formats, quantity default, per-share price override, plus worked structure examples. However, the `as_of` parameter is never mentioned, leaving one of three parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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+resource: 'Price an options position from the live chain and compute its payoff at expiry', and enumerates the outputs (net debit/credit, max profit, max loss, breakevens, probability of profit, net delta). This is clearly distinct from sibling tools like options_chain (fetch chain) or options_overview, so an agent can route without opening any schema.

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 a direct usage mandate: 'Use it for every structure you propose; never do this math yourself', which resolves the build-vs-call choice explicitly. It does not name a sibling alternative or a when-not condition, but for a self-contained pricing calculator there is little ambiguity about when to pick it over the chain tools.

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