Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Metrx MCP Server

Metrx MCP Server

by metrxbots
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Signal Readiness

metrx_get_signal_readiness
Read-onlyIdempotent

Diagnose org-scoped signal readiness across event coverage, label lag, join rate, volume-versus-power, and estimator eligibility; surface blocked signals and what unlocks a first verified verdict.

Instructions

Org-scoped signal-readiness diagnostics: per-agent event coverage, label lag, join rate, volume-vs-power (days to trial-ready), estimator eligibility, and blocked_on_signal proposals cross-linked to the failing readiness dimension. This is the "what unlocks your first verified verdict" surface. Read-only. Response is envelope-shaped: every numeric leaf is a MeasuredValue {value, ci_low, ci_high, method, data_through}. ci fields are null unless the source payload carries a real confidence interval — never fabricated. Requires an API key with the 'read' scope.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "metrx_get_signal_readiness"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.5.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent semantics, so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds authority requirements ('API key with the read scope'), an explicit envelope contract, and a non-fabrication guarantee for ci fields. Those are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs before interpreting confidence intervals and nulls.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by the content enumeration and then the response contract. It is dense with domain jargon and the em-dash aside about ci fields is long, but every sentence carries information an agent would otherwise have to guess.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no input parameters and no output schema, the description carries the return-shape burden and does so well, defining MeasuredValue and the null-ci rule. Auth scope and read-only nature are also covered, leaving no material gap for correct invocation.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies and there is nothing for the description to compensate for. The scope note ('org-scoped') implicitly clarifies that no id/filter arguments are expected.

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 names a specific verb+resource ('Org-scoped signal-readiness diagnostics') and then enumerates the exact dimensions returned: per-agent event coverage, label lag, join rate, volume-vs-power, estimator eligibility, and blocked_on_signal proposals. The framing sentence ('what unlocks your first verified verdict') gives an agent a crisp mental model that separates it from the many list-style metrx_get_* siblings.

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 rather than stated: the 'what unlocks your first verified verdict' line signals the diagnostic/onboarding scenario, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or named alternative among siblings such as metrx_get_health_scores or metrx_get_scorecard. An agent can infer intent but is not routed.

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