Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Trading Volatility MCP

Trading Volatility MCP

Official
by tradingvolatility
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_options_volume

Retrieve real-time options volume aggregated by strike for a ticker and expiration, with optional implied volatility columns.

Instructions

Get real-time options volume aggregated by strike for a ticker and a specific expiration. exp (the expiration date, required) selects the contract month; set include='iv' to add implied-volatility columns.

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": {
      "ticker": "<ticker>",
      "exp": "<exp>"
    },
    "name": "get_options_volume"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
expYes
tickerYes
includeNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It adds useful context: real-time data, aggregation by strike, exp selects contract month, include adds IV columns. However, it does not mention auth, rate limits, or behavior when no data is available.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second provides parameter guidance. No redundancy or filler. Front-loaded and appropriately sized.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values don't need explanation. The description covers purpose, key parameters, and optional behavior. It omits potential caveats (e.g., behavior with no trades) but is adequate for a focused data retrieval tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains exp (contract month) and include (adds IV columns); ticker is self-evident from the tool description. This adds meaning beyond the raw 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get real-time options volume aggregated by strike for a ticker and a specific expiration.' This clearly states what the tool does and distinguishes it from siblings like get_gamma_curve or get_gex_by_strike.

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?

No explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions are given. The description implies usage when options volume data is needed, and provides parameter usage hints (exp and include), but doesn't name sibling tools or edge cases.

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