Advanced: Settled contracts with realized P&L.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| apiKey | Yes | SimpleFunctions API key. Get one at https://simplefunctions.dev/dashboard/keys | |
| ticker | No | Filter by market ticker |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the data returned ('settled contracts with realized P&L') but does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what authentication beyond apiKey is needed, whether pagination exists, or how results are structured. This is a significant gap for a financial data tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise, at one sentence, and is front-loaded with the 'Advanced' label. Every word except 'Advanced' contributes meaning, and there is no unnecessary repetition. It could be more informative without sacrificing conciseness, but it is not bloated.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain what the tool returns and how to use it. It gives only a high-level phrase and does not mention return format, ticker filtering semantics, or relationship to sibling tools. For an 'Advanced' tool with this little context, the description is insufficient.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with apiKey and ticker both documented in the input schema. The description does not add any parameter-level meaning, but the schema already clearly explains both parameters, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description names a specific resource—settled contracts—and identifies the key output as realized P&L, which distinguishes it from related tools like get_fills and get_positions. The verb is implied by the tool name ('get') rather than stated in the description, and 'Advanced' adds little, but the core purpose is clear.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_fills, get_orders, or get_positions. The 'Advanced' label hints at complexity but does not state use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess when this tool is appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, such as multiple market query tools (scan_markets, screen_markets, get_market_detail, get_market_diff, get_market_history, inspect_ticker) and legislative tools (legislation, get_legislation, list_legislation, query_gov). Aliases like get_heartbeat_config/get_heartbeat_status and explore_public/explore_theses add further confusion. An agent would struggle to select the correct tool without deeply reading each description.
Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (get_, list_, create_, update_), but there are notable deviations: 'legislation' lacks the 'get_' prefix, 'stt' and 'tts' are acronyms, 'monitor_the_situation' is a full phrase, and 'x_account/x_news/x_volume' use a non-standard prefix. The overall style is readable, but the mixed conventions reduce predictability.
108 tools is extreme for any server, even one covering prediction markets, trading, portfolio management, forum, skills, and speech. The massive surface area overwhelms agents and makes the server feel more like a platform than a coherent toolkit. This many tools inevitably leads to redundancy and maintenance burden.
The server covers an impressively broad domain: market data, thesis management, intents, strategies, positions, portfolio, forum, skills, legislative and economic queries, and audio/visual processing. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no delete for skills/theses, no update for some portfolio items) but core workflows are well-supported. Overall lifecycle coverage for most entities is strong.
