search_charts

Identify historical chart patterns matching your stock symbol and date. Query 800M+ minute bars to retrieve top matches with similarity scores and distances for pattern analysis.

Instructions

Search for historically similar chart patterns.

Input a symbol and date (e.g. 'AAPL 2024-06-15') to find the top 10
most similar historical charts from 800M+ minute bars.
Results include match scores and similarity distances.

Args:
    query: Symbol + date, e.g. 'AAPL 2024-06-15' or 'TSLA 6/15/24 3d'
    timeframe: Session: rth (regular hours), premarket, rth_3d, rth_5d, or auto
    top_n: Number of results (1-50)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`query`	Yes
`timeframe`	No	auto
`top_n`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Tool Definition Quality

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Discloses dataset scale (800M+ minute bars) and result format (match scores, distances), but omits operational details like rate limits, caching, or idempotency since no annotations are provided.

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?

Well-structured with purpose upfront, followed by usage explanation and parameter details; the 'Args:' section is slightly informal but every sentence earns its place.

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?

Sufficiently complete given the output schema exists; covers input requirements and high-level result types without needing to detail return values.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Excellent compensation for 0% schema coverage by providing detailed semantics for all three parameters including format examples, valid enum values (rth, premarket), and constraints (1-50).

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?

Clearly states the tool searches for historically similar chart patterns using specific verbs and resources, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'analyze_pattern' or 'search_batch'.

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?

Provides input format examples ('AAPL 2024-06-15') and explains parameters, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'analyze_pattern' or other siblings.

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

Install Server

Chart Library

search_charts

Instructions

Input Schema

Output Schema

Tool Definition Quality

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API