Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
TradingView MCP

TradingView MCP

by madiver
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

chart_set_symbol

Set the symbol on a TradingView chart to a specified ticker, such as BTCUSD or AAPL, so you can switch instruments for analysis.

Instructions

Change the chart symbol

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": "chart_set_symbol"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolYesSymbol to set (e.g., BTCUSD, AAPL, ES1!, NYMEX:CL1!)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

There are no annotations and the description only says 'Change the chart symbol.' It implies mutation but discloses no side effects, prerequisites, permissions, reversibility, or what happens to the current chart state.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the action and target. It contains no filler, though it is so minimal that it omits useful context.

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 simple one-parameter setter, the description plus schema is minimally sufficient to invoke the tool. However, it lacks guidance on the active chart context, relationship to pane_set_symbol, and any behavioral expectations, leaving clear gaps.

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?

The input schema fully documents the single 'symbol' parameter with an example. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: change the chart symbol. It is clear and distinguishable from chart_set_timeframe and chart_set_type, though it does not explicitly differentiate from close siblings like pane_set_symbol.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as symbol_search, symbol_info, or pane_set_symbol. The description provides no context for choosing this tool over its siblings.

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