InsiderTrack MCP

leaderboard

Read-onlyIdempotent

Rank members of Congress by stock-picking performance, measuring how often their buys beat SPY after 90 days while requiring a minimum number of trades to avoid flukes.

Instructions

Members of Congress ranked by how often their stock buys beat SPY at 90 days.

Only members with at least min_trades measured buys are ranked, so a lucky single trade does not top the list. weight_in_score is the multiplier that record earns their trades in the composite score.

Args: min_trades: Minimum measured buys to qualify, 1-200 (default 10). limit: Rows to return, 1-50 (default 20).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`min_trades`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and closed-world behavior, so the description's job is lighter. It adds meaningful context about how the leaderboard is computed, including the min_trades qualification to avoid single-trade outliers and the composite-score multiplier, which goes beyond the annotation metadata.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by a compact rationale and a clearly formatted args list. Every sentence earns its place; there is no filler or repetition of schema fields.

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?

For a two-parameter read-only query tool with an output schema present, the description covers ranking semantics, qualification threshold, score composition, and parameter constraints. Nothing essential is missing for correct selection and invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description fully carries parameter documentation. It explicitly defines min_trades with its purpose, valid range, and default, and limit with its purpose, range, and default. This is exemplary compensation for an empty 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 states a specific verb-resource relationship: members of Congress are ranked by how often their stock buys beat SPY at 90 days. This clearly distinguishes the tool from the sibling list by naming the exact ranking metric and population.

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 usage context is implied: an agent should invoke this when a ranked leaderboard of Congress members' trading performance is needed. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over siblings such as top_signals or member_track_record, and no when-not-to-use exclusions.

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

Deploy Server