Files
Jason Lee 1a637e7d0b docs: Align the signals reference with the RPC contract
Checked the reference against the `QuerySignals` / `Signal` RPC definitions
and against production responses:

- `status` documents its lifecycle values (0 pending … 5 analysis submit
  failed) instead of being left unexplained.
- `total` is `int32`, matching `QuerySignalsResponse`.
- `risk_level` and `display_control` are dropped from the field tables and
  examples — neither is in the `Signal` message, and production returns
  neither.
- `catalyst_name` says what it matches: the triggering factor's name
  (`EARNINGS_RELEASED`, `macd_12_26_9`), not the prose `key_catalyst` a signal
  displays. Filtering by the value shown in `key_catalyst` returns nothing, so
  both fields now spell out which is which.
- `start_time` / `end_time` also accept a Unix timestamp (≥ 10¹² read as
  milliseconds), per the field definitions.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-25 20:19:31 +08:00
..
2025-07-18 16:36:28 +08:00

vitepress 常用语法

  • // [!code focus] 可以使得代码块聚焦某一行
  • ts{2-3,5} 使得第 2-3 行和第 5 行显示高亮
  • 在某一行上添加 // [!code --]// [!code ++] 注释将创建该行的差异,同时保留代码块的颜色
    • // [!code warning]// [!code error] 错误和警告
  • ::: code-group 实现代码组
  • :::tabs key:language 实现记忆组切换