trade_watchers discards the user-supplied label in its markdown summary lines #239

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-08-12 23:16:31 +00:00 by coilyco-ops · 0 comments

coilyco-ops commented

2026-08-12 23:16:31 +00:00

Member

QA sweep, 2026-08-12. Minor.

Observed

Creating a watcher with an explicit label:

trade_watchers(action="create", kind="price", value="CementItem",
               op="under", threshold=1, label="qa-probe-cement")

The JSON stores it correctly ("label": "qa-probe-cement"), but the markdown line ignores it:

Watcher created — w_1c7ed83dc1c9 watching Cement under 1.

The schema says label "defaults to a description of the query", implying an explicit label should win. action=evaluate does use it (w_1c7ed83dc1c9 qa-probe-cement — 4 matching now), so the create path is the odd one out.

Expected

Create summary shows the supplied label, falling back to describe only when none was given.

Otherwise: this tool is clean

Full lifecycle verified on a live server — create → list → evaluate → remove → list. Price predicate matched correctly (4 Cement trades at 0.6/0.6/0.7/0.8, all under the threshold of 1, cheapest reported as 0.6), feed/display split behaved as documented, lastSeen advanced, and removal was clean with no residue. It was the only tool in the 22-tool sweep with no data defects.

QA sweep, 2026-08-12. Minor. ## Observed Creating a watcher with an explicit label: ``` trade_watchers(action="create", kind="price", value="CementItem", op="under", threshold=1, label="qa-probe-cement") ``` The JSON stores it correctly (`"label": "qa-probe-cement"`), but the markdown line ignores it: > **Watcher created** — `w_1c7ed83dc1c9` watching **Cement under 1**. The schema says label "defaults to a description of the query", implying an explicit label should win. `action=evaluate` does use it (`w_1c7ed83dc1c9 qa-probe-cement — 4 matching now`), so the create path is the odd one out. ## Expected Create summary shows the supplied label, falling back to `describe` only when none was given. ## Otherwise: this tool is clean Full lifecycle verified on a live server — `create` → `list` → `evaluate` → `remove` → `list`. Price predicate matched correctly (4 Cement trades at 0.6/0.6/0.7/0.8, all under the threshold of 1, cheapest reported as 0.6), feed/display split behaved as documented, `lastSeen` advanced, and removal was clean with no residue. It was the only tool in the 22-tool sweep with no data defects.

coilyco-ops referenced this issue

2026-08-12 23:34:54 +00:00

Tracking: 2026-08-12 full-surface QA sweep of the eco MCP (22 tools, 23 findings) #240

coilyco-ops referenced this issue

2026-08-12 23:36:09 +00:00

Tracking: 2026-08-12 full-surface QA sweep of the eco MCP (22 tools, 23 findings) #240

coilyco-ops referenced this issue

2026-08-12 23:47:23 +00:00

Tracking: 2026-08-12 full-surface QA sweep of the eco MCP (22 tools, 23 findings) #240

coilyco-ops referenced this issue from a commit

2026-08-13 04:27:10 +00:00

fix(watchers): keep the supplied label in the create summary