Skip to main content
Glama

Data Orlando

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Subscribe to Alerts

subscribe
Idempotent

Create a proactive monitoring subscription to a live-data event stream. Returns the new subscription id. Requires a Pipeworx OAuth account (anonymous + BYO cannot persist subscriptions). Supported types: "sec_8k" (8-K filings matching ticker + item codes — e.g. items:["5.02"] = officer change), "polymarket_edge" (Polymarket↔Kalshi cross-venue mispricings — params:{topic:"fed"}), "fred_series" (new FRED observations — params:{series_id:"UNRATE"}). Delivery channels: feed (always on — pull via recent_alerts or GET registry.pipeworx.io/alerts.json), and optionally email (set delivery:{email:"you@x.com"}) or sms (delivery:{sms:"+15551234567"} — phone must be verified at /account first; 10/day cap).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesSubscription type.
paramsYesType-specific filter. sec_8k: {ticker:"AAPL", items?:["5.02","1.01"]}. polymarket_edge: {topic:"fed", min_spread_bps?:500}. fred_series: {series_id:"UNRATE"}. patent_grant: {applicant:"Apple Inc."}. clinical_trial: {sponsor?:"Pfizer", condition?:"lung cancer", phase?:"PHASE3"} (sponsor or condition required).
deliveryNoOptional delivery channels in addition to the always-on persistent feed. {email:"you@x.com"} sends a templated alert per fired event. {sms:"+15551234567"} sends an SMS per event — must match the verified phone on the caller's account (verify at https://pipeworx.io/account first; 10/day cap). {webhook:"https://..."} POSTs each event JSON to your endpoint, HMAC-signed — the response includes delivery.webhook_secret (whsec_…) ONCE; verify X-Pipeworx-Signature = sha256 HMAC of "<X-Pipeworx-Timestamp>.<raw body>". Auto-disabled after 10 consecutive failing runs.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses behavioral traits beyond annotations, such as the requirement for OAuth, the inability for anonymous/BYO accounts to persist subscriptions, SMS verification and rate limits, webhook signing and auto-disable. It adds context about return value and always-on feed. However, it does not address the idempotentHint annotation (creates a new subscription each time vs. idempotent), which is a minor gap.

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?

The description is well-structured with a clear opening sentence, followed by organized details on requirements, types, and delivery channels. It is somewhat verbose but each sentence adds value. The information is front-loaded, and the formatting (e.g., examples in quotes) aids readability.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (multiple subscription types, delivery options, constraints) and the absence of an output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers the return value, authentication prerequisites, type-specific parameters, delivery channels with limits, and failure behavior (webhook auto-disable). Only the idempotency aspect is missing, which is minor.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds substantial meaning beyond the schema. It explains each subscription type's parameters with concrete examples (e.g., sec_8k: {ticker, items}, polymarket_edge: {topic, min_spread_bps}), delivery channel formats, and constraints. This level of detail is highly beneficial for correct invocation.

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's purpose: 'Create a proactive monitoring subscription to a live-data event stream. Returns the new subscription id.' It uses a specific verb ('create') and resource ('subscription'), and distinguishes from siblings like list_subscriptions and unsubscribe.

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 provides explicit context for when to use this tool: it requires a Pipeworx OAuth account, lists supported subscription types with detailed parameter examples, and explains delivery channels and their constraints (e.g., SMS must be verified, 10/day cap). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives, but the guidance is clear and sufficient.

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

All Data Orlando toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several clusters overlap in purpose: ask_pipeworx / ask_pipeworx_beta / ask_pipeworx_grounded / deep_research all answer factual questions, and the six Polymarket tools (arbitrage, edges, edge_tracker, fill_risk, kalshi_spread, bet_research) have subtle boundaries even with detailed descriptions. The descriptions are strong, but an agent must read carefully to reliably pick the right tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, resolve_entity, validate_claim) with recognizable family prefixes (polymarket_*, pipeworx_*, ask_pipeworx_*). Minor deviations like single-noun names (datasets, metadata, query) and mixed lookup verbs (ask vs query vs search vs discover) keep it from a 5.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is heavy for a single server, and the scope sprawls across general data routing, prediction-market analytics, memory management, subscription bookkeeping, AI visibility checks, and npm dependency scanning. The families are organized, but the count exceeds the 25-tool threshold and would be better split into focused servers.

Completeness4/5

For a data-research server, coverage is broad: universal routing, grounded answers, deep research, entity profiles, comparisons, change feeds, claim verification, dataset search/query/metadata, subscriptions, and memory. Minor gaps exist—no subscription update operation and no full-catalog browse beyond search—but agents can work around them.

Resources