Skip to main content
Glama

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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description provides extensive behavioral details beyond annotations: requires OAuth, returns subscription ID, delivery channels limits (10/day SMS), webhook auto-disable after 10 failures. No contradiction with annotations.

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 fairly long but well-structured, front-loading the purpose. Every sentence adds value, though minor trimming could improve conciseness.

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 complexity (3 params, nested objects, no output schema), the description is highly complete: explains types, parameters, delivery, requirements, limits, and response content (subscription ID).

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds substantial meaning: explains each type and params structure, delivery options with examples and constraints, and webhook signing secret.

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 creates a proactive monitoring subscription to a live-data event stream and returns the subscription ID. It distinguishes from sibling tools 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 explains when to use the tool (to subscribe), prerequisites (Pipeworx OAuth account), and limitations (anonymous/BYO cannot persist). It does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is clear.

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
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools form near-overlapping clusters: ask_pipeworx/ask_pipeworx_beta/ask_pipeworx_grounded/deep_research all route questions, and bet_research/polymarket_edges/polymarket_arbitrage/polymarket_fill_risk/polymarket_kalshi_spread all target prediction-market edges. ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx today, so an agent must read long descriptions to pick correctly. Most other tools are distinct, but the ambiguous clusters pull the score down.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names use snake_case and are readable, but conventions mix: many are verb_noun (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, discover_tools, subscribe), several are noun phrases (macro_snapshot, indicator, entity_profile, polymarket_arbitrage), and a few are adjective_noun (recent_alerts, deep_research). The near-duplicate ask_pipeworx / ask_pipeworx_beta / ask_pipeworx_grounded suffixes form the only consistent family, but overall the naming pattern is not uniform.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is well beyond the 15-tool well-scoped range and even past the 25-tool 'too many' threshold. The server tries to be a data router, prediction-market desk, AI visibility checker, memory store, and subscription manager all at once, and includes an intentional duplicate (ask_pipeworx_beta). Several tools (remember/recall/forget, subscribe/unsubscribe/list_subscriptions/recent_alerts) could be their own server.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers question answering, deep research, entity resolution/profile/comparison, macro indicators, prediction-market analytics, subscriptions, memory, and feedback—no obvious dead ends for the main workflows. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct generic web search, no update for saved memory other than overwrite, and some niche additions like generate_llms_txt feel out of place), but the core data and research lifecycle is well covered.