sima

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

plot_residual_ccf

Plot residual cross-correlations pair by pair for the last estimated model to identify relationships left unexplained beyond the confidence band.

Instructions

FIGURE — The residual cross-correlations of the last estimated model, pair by pair: GraphMaker's two-sided CCF (Treadway's, the suite's reference), titled "A - B" with A leading at k > 0, and Hosking's portmanteau below as GraphMaker labels it, P (not Ljung-Box's Q). What is left beyond the band is what the model does not carry. nlags defaults to twice the frequency. On a VEC: the residuals of its stationary form (nabla Y2 and the equilibrium errors, drvec's).

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "plot_residual_ccf"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`path`	No
`nlags`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Oct 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it discloses the figure composition, title convention, CCF versus portmanteau distinction, band interpretation, `nlags` default, and VEC residual handling. It does not state whether the figure is returned, saved, or displayed, so it is not fully exhaustive.

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?

The description front-loads the purpose and every sentence adds substantive detail. It is dense with domain jargon and the middle sentence is hard to parse, but there is no filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a plotting tool with no output schema, the description explains the figure content well. However, zero schema description coverage and no annotations leave parameter roles and alternative-tool selection underdescribed.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description only clarifies `nlags` by giving its default. It never explains `path`, and `name` is only indirectly implied by 'last estimated model' rather than documented.

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 names a specific figure resource — residual cross-correlations of the last estimated model — and explains that it includes GraphMaker's two-sided CCF plus Hosking's portmanteau. It is clear what the tool produces, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as check_residuals.

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?

Usage is implied by phrases such as 'the last estimated model' and the VEC-specific note about stationary-form residuals. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives, nor any when-not conditions.

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