Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Trading Signals MCP

Trading Signals MCP

by gdietsch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Futures Session Brief ($0.03)

session_brief
Read-only

Get a pre-session futures briefing with upcoming US high-impact releases, Treasury yields, CFTC positioning, holiday flags, and a safe-to-trade verdict for ES, NQ, CL, GC, or ZN.

Instructions

Price: $0.03 USDC per call on Base, paid automatically via x402 from X402_PRIVATE_KEY. Session brief for ES/NQ/CL/GC/ZN: upcoming US high-impact releases with ET times and minutes-to, latest/prior BLS values, Treasury 2y/10y/2s10s with daily change, CFTC COT net positioning with 3y percentile, holiday/early-close flags, and a safeToTrade verdict. Failed calls (4xx/5xx) are not charged. Informational only, not investment advice.

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": {
      "symbol": "<symbol>"
    },
    "name": "session_brief"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolYesFutures root: ES (E-mini S&P 500), NQ (E-mini Nasdaq-100), CL (WTI crude), GC (gold), ZN (10-year T-note)
windowNoLook-ahead window in minutes (1-240, default 30)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare read-only, open-world and non-idempotent; the description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the $0.03 x402 charge per call, the X402_PRIVATE_KEY environment requirement, and that 4xx/5xx failures are not billed. It also flags informational-only status. It does not explain why the call is non-idempotent (time-relative fields), which is the one behavioral hint left unstated.

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 text is compact and mostly front-loaded, but it leads with the pricing sentence rather than the tool's purpose, and the payload inventory is a single run-on list. Every sentence carries information, so there is little waste, though ordering could serve the agent better.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of saying what comes back, and it does so field-group by field-group (release times and minutes-to, BLS latest/prior, 2y/10y/2s10s with daily change, COT net positioning with 3y percentile, holiday flags, verdict). Payment and auth prerequisites are covered. The only gap is how the window parameter shapes the returned event set.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, with the symbol enum and the window range fully documented in the schema, so the baseline applies. The description never mentions the window parameter or how it bounds the look-ahead horizon, so it adds no meaning on top of the schema.

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 the resource precisely: a session brief for ES/NQ/CL/GC/ZN containing releases, BLS values, Treasury curves, COT positioning, holiday flags and a safeToTrade verdict. That inventory of returned data makes the tool's function unambiguous. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with close siblings like event_gate or pre_trade_check, which cover overlapping pre-session checks.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance; the agent must infer that this is a pre-session prep call from the data listed. No alternative tools are named even though event_gate and pre_trade_check appear to sit adjacent to this one. The only operational guidance given is billing behavior.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools