BlindOracle

add_price_alert

Set a price alert for any asset to get notified when it reaches a specified target price above or below a threshold.

Instructions

Add a price alert for an asset.

REQ-ALERT-006: MCP tool exposure

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": {
      "asset": "<asset>",
      "target_price": "<target_price>"
    },
    "name": "add_price_alert"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`asset`	Yes
`direction`	No	above
`target_price`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, idempotency, rate limits, or authorization needs. For a mutation tool, this leaves significant gaps for the agent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short but includes an unnecessary line ('REQ-ALERT-006: MCP tool exposure') that adds no value. It is mostly concise but wastes one sentence on irrelevant metadata.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's mutation nature and 3 parameters, the description is incomplete. It fails to mention return value, success confirmation, or any side effects. Although an output schema exists (not shown), the description should provide enough context for safe invocation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% (no parameter descriptions). The description adds no explanation beyond what the schema provides. While 'asset' and 'target_price' are self-explanatory, 'direction' (default 'above') is not clarified, leaving ambiguity about acceptable values.

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's purpose ('Add a price alert for an asset.') with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_alert_history and configure_alerts, though not explicitly. A higher score would require explicit sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., configure_alerts, start_alert_monitoring). There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or conditions for use.

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