Skip to main content
Glama
horustechltd

horus-flow-mcp

by horustechltd

get_composite_intelligence

Combines orderflow, sentiment, leverage, and smart money positioning to produce a composite intelligence score (0-100) and a BUY, SHORT, or STAY_OUT verdict for any trading pair.

Instructions

Get composite intelligence score (0-100) with tactical verdict.

Returns a score from 0-100 and a verdict: BUY, SHORT, or STAY_OUT.
Combines orderflow, sentiment, leverage ratios, and smart money positioning
into a single actionable number. Score < 45 = dangerous, > 65 = opportunity.

Args:
    symbol: Trading pair (default: BTCUSDT)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolNoBTCUSDT

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The tool handler decorated with @mcp.tool(). Fetches composite intelligence score from the Horus API and returns JSON.
    async def get_composite_intelligence(symbol: str = "BTCUSDT") -> str:
        """Get composite intelligence score (0-100) with tactical verdict.
        
        Returns a score from 0-100 and a verdict: BUY, SHORT, or STAY_OUT.
        Combines orderflow, sentiment, leverage ratios, and smart money positioning
        into a single actionable number. Score < 45 = dangerous, > 65 = opportunity.
        
        Args:
            symbol: Trading pair (default: BTCUSDT)
        """
        data = await _fetch(f"/v1/intelligence/composite?symbol={symbol}")
        return json.dumps(data, indent=2)
  • Documentation describing the score range (0-100) and verdicts: BUY, SHORT, STAY_OUT.
    Combines orderflow, sentiment, leverage ratios, and smart money positioning
    into a single actionable number. Score < 45 = dangerous, > 65 = opportunity.
    
    Args:
        symbol: Trading pair (default: BTCUSDT)
    """
    data = await _fetch(f"/v1/intelligence/composite?symbol={symbol}")
    return json.dumps(data, indent=2)
  • The @mcp.tool() decorator registers this function as an MCP tool named 'get_composite_intelligence'.
    @mcp.tool()
  • The _fetch helper used by get_composite_intelligence to make the HTTP request to the Horus API.
    async def _fetch(endpoint: str) -> dict:
        """Fetch data from the live RapidAPI endpoint."""
        async with httpx.AsyncClient(timeout=10.0) as client:
            try:
                resp = await client.get(
                    f"{RAPIDAPI_BASE_URL}{endpoint}",
                    headers=HEADERS,
                )
                if resp.status_code == 200:
                    return resp.json()
                elif resp.status_code in [401, 403]:
                    return {
                        "error": True,
                        "signal": "UNAUTHORIZED",
                        "detail": "Invalid or missing RAPIDAPI_KEY. Please verify your RapidAPI subscription."
                    }
                elif resp.status_code == 429:
                    return {
                        "error": True,
                        "signal": "RATE_LIMITED",
                        "detail": "You have exceeded your RapidAPI quota. Please upgrade your plan."
                    }
                return {
                    "error": True,
                    "status_code": resp.status_code,
                    "detail": resp.text,
                }
            except Exception as e:
                return {
                    "error": True,
                    "detail": f"Network Error: {str(e)}"
                }
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the output structure and basic interpretation but lacks details on authentication requirements, data freshness, or any side effects. The description is somewhat transparent but not 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 is concise with about 4 sentences. It leads with the main purpose, then explains output, composition, and interpretation. It is well-structured and efficient, though slightly more bullet-point structuring could improve readability.

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?

The tool has an output schema (indicated but not shown), and the description adequately explains the return values (score and verdict). Given the single parameter and absence of annotations, the description covers the essential context for an agent to invoke the tool 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?

There is one parameter (symbol) with 0% schema description coverage, meaning the schema only provides a title and default. The description adds semantic meaning by stating 'Trading pair (default: BTCUSDT)', which is clear and helpful beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the tool gets a composite intelligence score with a tactical verdict (BUY, SHORT, STAY_OUT). It specifies the score range (0-100) and combines multiple factors like orderflow, sentiment, leverage ratios, and smart money positioning, distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on specific flows or heatmaps.

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?

The description provides interpretation guidance (score <45 dangerous, >65 opportunity) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_market_intelligence or get_crypto_flow. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions are given.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/horustechltd/horus-flow-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server