Skip to main content
Glama
tedorigawa001

TradingView-MCP

run_price_action_pattern_study

Quantifies forward returns of three price-action patterns as naked entries: enters at signal-bar close, exits h bars later with no stop or target, and benchmarks against clock-hour effects.

Instructions

Measure what the three price-action patterns are worth as naked entries on the chart's own bars: enter at the signal bar's close in the direction the pattern reads, exit h bars later, with no stop, target or filter. Uses the same rules as the Pine template at its default settings. Reports each pattern's forward return with an IID normal-approximation interval for description only alongside the clock hours it fires in and what any bar in those hours does anyway, because a pattern that only fires at a session boundary will otherwise report that boundary as an effect.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoBars to read. More bars is a longer sample, never a different rule.
chart_indexNo
expected_symbolYes
expected_timeframeYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.10

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does so thoroughly. It discloses the entry rule, exit horizon, absence of stops/targets/filters, the use of Pine template default rules, the description-only IID normal-approximation interval, and the session-boundary caveat that prevents a common misinterpretation.

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 description is a dense but well-structured single paragraph. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds methodology, output details, and a valuable interpretive caveat without filler. Every clause earns its place given the complexity of the study.

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?

For a research tool with no output schema, the description explains the study design, what is reported, and how to avoid misreading the results. Minor gaps remain around which three patterns are studied, the exact meaning of 'h', and chart_index semantics, but the required parameters and study behavior are largely inferable.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 25%, with only 'count' documented. The description does not explain expected_symbol, expected_timeframe, or chart_index, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap. It only implicitly references the chart through 'chart's own bars,' which is not enough parameter-level guidance.

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 opens with a specific verb, 'Measure', and a specific object: what the three price-action patterns are worth as naked entries on the chart's own bars. It adds concrete entry/exit rules, which makes the tool's distinct purpose clear relative to the many sibling event-study and audit tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly establishes the intended use: evaluating price-action patterns with no stop, target, or filter, and comparing them against the same hours' baseline behavior. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select this tool over sibling studies.

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