Optional: capital-aware pre-trade /review (advisory) as an MCP tool

[babyblueviper1]

QuantScope's comprehensive workflow for AI-driven stock analysis could benefit from an optional enhancement: integrating a pre-trade verdict system like /review. This feature provides a capital-scale-aware verdict (approve/approve_with_concerns/reject) before committing funds, complementing your current research and decision-making process without altering your authoritative architecture. Our own live Bitcoin bot uses this gate for every entry, with outcomes logged in a public, on-chain-verifiable ledger. This could be a useful addition to ensure robust checks before trade execution. If QuantScope also focuses on trading strategy development, consider our edge-idea bounty: propose a strategy, and if it passes our backtest gate, earn a flat sats bounty. This is a revenue-share on the idea, with no capital pooling involved. If useful, I can provide a one-line MCP config or a small docs PR to help integrate this feature. Full integration spec below ensures it's implementable as-is.

QuantScope 是一个面向中文用户的 AI 股票分析平台，可以考虑集成一个可选的交易前审核系统，如 /review。此功能在资金投入前提供一个资本规模感知的审核结果（批准/有保留的批准/拒绝），从而在不改变现有架构的情况下补充您的研究和决策流程。我们的比特币机器人也使用此机制进行每笔交易的审核，结果记录在可验证的公开链上。对于策略开发，您也可以考虑我们的策略创意赏金：提交策略创意，通过审核测试即有赏金。无需资金池，纯创意收益分享。若有需要，我可以提供一行 MCP 配置或小型文档 PR 以帮助集成。完整的集成规范见下文。

---

Full integration spec (machine-readable — enough to implement or auto-implement without further questions)

REST (simplest):

POST https://api.babyblueviper.com/review
Authorization: Bearer <INVINO_API_KEY>
Content-Type: application/json

{ "action": "<the proposed trade/decision, e.g. 'OPEN long BTC 5% of portfolio'>",
  "context": "<optional, as coarse as you like — e.g. 'equity ~10k, signal: MA cross'>",
  "sign": true }

Response: {"verdict": "approve|approve_with_concerns|reject", "confidence": 0.x, "issues": [...], "proof": {...}}

• API key: free instant POST /register {"label": "<your-project>"} → pay-per-call from a small balance (POST /billing/topup; Lightning/USDC/card). A /review call is a few US cents. No subscription.
• The signed proof is verifiable by anyone, no auth, at POST /verify-proof — it contains only hashes of the reviewed action plus the verdict, never raw text, keys, or account data.
• MCP alternative: streamable HTTP endpoint https://api.babyblueviper.com/mcp (tool: review); server card at /.well-known/mcp/server-card.json; full docs in llms.txt at the API root.

Suggested shape (opt-in, zero default impact): config flag (default off) + API-key env var; call after your pipeline forms its recommendation, before output; render the verdict as an additional advisory field — never override your own conclusion; on any error/timeout degrade gracefully (review_unavailable) so your flow never blocks on us.

Why trust the verdict: our own live Bitcoin bot runs every trade through this same endpoint, and the full verdict history — wins AND losses — is published, signed, and on-chain-checkable at https://api.babyblueviper.com/ledger.

[Kai-dev7]

Thanks for the detailed proposal.

QuantScope already exposes MCP endpoints for analysis/report workflows, so an optional advisory review step is technically compatible with the project shape. That said, the current project scope is research, education, and strategy experimentation. It does not execute trades, manage capital, or provide authoritative investment advice.

For that reason, I would not want to add a third-party pre-trade review service as a default dependency or as part of the core analysis pipeline. If we support something like this, it should be:

• fully opt-in and disabled by default
• configured only through explicit user-provided credentials
• treated as an advisory annotation, never as an override of QuantScope's own output
• non-blocking, with timeout/error fallback such as review_unavailable
• clearly documented as external third-party output, not financial advice
• implemented through a generic external review hook if possible, rather than coupling the core project to one vendor

A small docs PR showing how users can call your MCP/REST endpoint externally after get_final_report would be acceptable. A deeper integration would need to preserve the boundaries above and avoid changing QuantScope's positioning from research/report generation into trade execution gating.

Thanks again for sharing the spec.