Skip to main content
Glama

Futuur

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
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses auth requirements (anonymous/BYO cannot persist), per-type examples, SMS verification and cap, webhook signing and auto-disable after 10 failures. This goes well beyond the annotations, which only indicate readOnly=false, openWorld=true, idempotent=true.

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?

Despite being long, the description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every clause adds either a requirement, a type example, or a delivery detail; no filler.

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?

Covers return value, authentication needs, supported types with examples, delivery channels, SMS/email/webhook behavior, and a failure auto-disable rule. The absence of an output schema is sufficiently compensated by the explicit return value statement.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage of all parameters with detailed descriptions, including type-specific params and delivery formats. The description adds some interpretive value (e.g., 'items:["5.02"] = officer change') but mostly restates schema content, so baseline 3.

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?

Clearly states it creates a proactive monitoring subscription and returns the new subscription id. The description distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_subscriptions and unsubscribe by focusing on creation.

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?

Provides explicit prerequisites (OAuth account) and mentions the always-on feed as an alternative retrieval mechanism ('pull via recent_alerts'). However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other subscription management tools in detail, so it's slightly shy of ideal.

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

All Futuur 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping or near-identical purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and validate_claim all answer factual questions with varying degrees of grounding. The polymarket_* family (edges, arbitrage, fill_risk, edge_tracker) and bet_research also create boundary confusion. An agent would struggle to consistently select the correct tool without deep reading of each description.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (search_markets, get_market, compare_entities, resolve_entity), but there are clear outliers like pipeworx_trending, recent_alerts, top_markets, and pipeworx_feedback which use adjective_noun or noun_adjective forms. The pattern is mostly consistent but has enough deviations to feel mixed.

Tool Count2/5

With 34 tools, the surface is decidedly heavy. Many tools serve entirely different domains (memory, subscriptions, AI visibility, npm dependency scanning, cross-venue arbitrage) rather than a unified purpose. This feels like several server concepts merged into one, making the count inappropriate for a single coherent server.

Completeness3/5

The data-research side is fairly comprehensive: querying, grounding, comparisons, profiles, claim validation, entity resolution, change tracking, and memory are all covered. However, for the nominal Futuur prediction-market domain, only read-only market lookup exists — no trading, account management, or order placement. Subscription CRUD is also missing an update operation, and several research tools only cover US public companies and specific data sources.

Resources