mcp-server-worldquantbrain

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List my alphas

list_alphas

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search your alphas by name, tag, status, region, and performance filters, then page through results with offset and limit.

Instructions

Search the user's alphas. Use next_offset to page; BRAIN stops at offset 10,000.

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": "list_alphas"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tag`	No
`name`	No	Exact alpha name.
`color`	No
`delay`	No	Data delay, 0 or 1.
`limit`	No
`order`	No	Sort key, e.g. -dateCreated or -is.sharpe.	-dateCreated
`hidden`	No
`offset`	No
`region`	No	Market region, e.g. USA. Empty uses the default.
`status`	No	UNSUBMITTED, ACTIVE or DECOMMISSIONED.
`category`	No
`favorite`	No
`universe`	No	Universe, e.g. TOP3000. Empty uses the default.
`alpha_type`	No	REGULAR or SUPER.
`min_sharpe`	No
`min_fitness`	No
`extra_params`	No	Raw query parameters passed through to BRAIN.
`max_turnover`	No
`created_after`	No	ISO 8601 timestamp.
`created_before`	No	ISO 8601 timestamp.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No
`items`	No
`next_offset`	No
`truncated_by_api`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real context: the hard BRAIN cap at offset 10,000 is a behavioral limit an agent cannot infer from structured fields. It does not explain what next_offset is or where it comes from, which leaves the paging contract slightly ambiguous.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with purpose before the paging caveat, with no filler. The only defect is the unexplained 'next_offset' term, which is terse at the cost of clarity rather than verbose.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 20-parameter search tool, the description says nothing about how filters combine, what defaults apply, or what 'next_offset' refers to, even though an output schema exists and returns need not be described. Annotations cover the safety profile, but the filtering semantics — the actual complexity of this tool — are left unaddressed.

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?

With 20 parameters and only 50% schema description coverage, roughly ten filters (tag, color, hidden, favorite, category, min_sharpe, min_fitness, max_turnover, limit, offset) are documented in neither schema nor description. The description's only parameter-adjacent content is 'next_offset', a name that does not match the schema's 'offset' parameter and could mislead an agent into looking for a nonexistent argument.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: 'Search the user's alphas' makes clear this is a filtered list of the caller's own alphas, distinct from get_alpha (single alpha) and the various list_* metadata siblings. It stops short of naming an alternative or noting when to prefer get_alpha, so it is clear but not sibling-differentiated.

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 by 'Search the user's alphas' plus paging advice, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus get_alpha or the recordset/message listing tools, and no prerequisites. The one piece of guidance given — 'Use next_offset to page' — is helpful but refers to a field that is not present in the input schema.

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