Skip to main content
Glama

WaveGuard

waveguard_trajectory_scan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Analyze sequence drift and regime shifts over ordered samples.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sequenceYesOrdered samples (time sequence) to scan for drift and regime shifts.
trainingYes2+ baseline normal samples used to establish the reference regime.
field_levelNo0 = real scalar field, 1 = complex field.
sensitivityNoAnomaly sensitivity multiplier (default: 1.0).
encoder_typeNoOptional encoder override. Omit to auto-detect.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, which cover safety. The description adds context about analyzing drift/shifts but does not disclose behavioral details like what happens with parameter variations or error conditions.

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 single, clear, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It achieves maximum conciseness.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects. The description focuses only on purpose and lacks details on return values or how to interpret results, but annotations compensate for some context. It is minimally adequate.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add meaning. It does not elaborate on parameters beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high coverage.

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 the tool analyzes sequence drift and regime shifts over ordered samples. It distinguishes itself from siblings like waveguard_scan_timeseries by explicitly mentioning 'regime shifts' and 'drift'.

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 description implies it is used for detecting drift and regime shifts in ordered samples, but no guidance is given on when to use it versus alternatives like waveguard_scan or waveguard_phase_coherence. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose. While tools like waveguard_scan and waveguard_scan_timeseries both detect anomalies, their descriptions clearly differentiate structured data from time-series data. Similarly, token risk, volume check, and price manipulation tools address separate aspects of token analysis, avoiding overlap.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the consistent pattern 'waveguard_<descriptive_name>' in snake_case. The names are descriptive and predictable, making it easy to infer functionality from the name alone. No mixed conventions or vague names are present.

Tool Count4/5

19 tools is on the higher side but still appropriate given the broad domain of crypto analytics, anomaly detection, and market data. Each tool serves a specific purpose, and the count is justified by the comprehensive feature set. However, a few tools could potentially be merged without loss of clarity.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of functionalities: health check, market data fetching, fingerprinting, similarity comparison, anomaly detection (structured and time-series), risk assessment (token, price manipulation, volume, wallet), counterfactuals, and interaction matrices. Some minor gaps exist, such as missing data export or visualization tools, but core workflows are well-supported.

Resources