list_estimates
All estimates for a ticker. Costs 0.01 USDC via x402.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ticker | Yes | ||
| payment_token | No | base64 x402 payload |
xDEO — Earnings Oracle
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, but description discloses cost (0.01 USDC via x402) which is critical behavior. Lacks explicit read-only claim, but inferences safe.
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?
Single sentence with no waste, front-loaded with purpose and cost. Every word earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Missing return format, pagination, or rate limits. With no output schema, description should clarify what 'All estimates' entails. Cost info helps, but incomplete for full use.
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 coverage is 50%, and description adds no parameter detail beyond the schema. The schema’s ticker lacks description; payment_token described as base64 payload. Description doesn't compensate.
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 clearly states it lists all estimates for a ticker, distinguishing it from siblings like read_estimate (single) and submit_estimate. The name aligns with action.
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 implies use when wanting all estimates for a ticker and includes cost context. No explicit when-not or alternatives, but sibling tools provide differentiation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: listing tickers, estimates, submissions, consensus, AI thesis, leaderboard, and verdict. No two tools overlap in function; even 'ai_thesis' and 'read_estimate' are differentiated by the synthesis aspect.
Naming Consistency3/5
Naming is mixed: some tools use verb_noun (list_estimates, submit_estimate) while others are bare nouns (leaderboard, verdict). This inconsistency could confuse an agent expecting a uniform pattern, though the names are individually clear.
Tool Count5/5
With 8 tools, the server covers the core workflows of an earnings oracle (browsing, analyzing, submitting, evaluating) without excessive or insufficient tools. The count is well-scoped for the domain.
Completeness5/5
The tool surface appears complete: discovery (list_tickers), data retrieval (list_estimates, ticker_consensus, read_estimate, ai_thesis), contribution (submit_estimate), and post-earnings analysis (verdict) plus reputation (leaderboard). No obvious gaps.