0saas

Job ticket 941004 · consumer · rule-sheet desk · no subscription

TradingView Basic is US$0 forever. One chart, two indicators — the part it cannot give you is a rule you can check.

1 chart per tab, 2 indicators, 1 watchlist of 30 symbols, 3 alerts, 180 days of minute data, a 20-second calculation cap. Every one of those limits is on watching. Deciding what would prove you wrong is writing, and this page ships two prompts for it.

TradingView is a trademark of TradingView, Inc. This is an independent, unaffiliated comparison built on TradingView's own published pricing page, linked below and re-read every thirty days. Nothing here is investment advice.

The rule desk — rendered in this browser

Source: noneRendered: 0Uploaded to 0saas: nothing

Sample data is illustrative, not a claim about TradingView. Every TradingView figure on this page comes from the linked pricing page, read 2026-09-28.

The prompt pack

Two prompts, each mapped one-to-one onto a TradingView feature you are currently rationed on. Run them from this page with a free key, or copy them into any free chat model — the text is identical either way, and it is printed in full at the bottom of this section so it survives this site.

Loading the pack from tools.json… If this fails, the full prompt text is still readable below.

One-time unlocks only, never a subscription. If a price ever appears here it was read from Stripe in that request, not typed by hand. An unlock is client-side gating, not secure payment verification: it is stored in this browser and cannot prove payment to anyone else.

What TradingView's own pricing page says

Read from tradingview.com/pricing — plans and the Basic column on 2026-09-28. Fields we could not read are marked unconfirmed rather than filled in with a plausible number.

What Basic meters, and what the rule desk hands over — verified 2026-09-28
The jobTradingView's own pricing page (read 2026-09-28)What it costsThis page + a free-tier model
Watching1 chart per tab, 2 indicatorsUS$0Not what this page is for
Charts, layouts, alerts2 charts / 5 indicators on EssentialUS$12.95/mo (annual)The words stay free at every tier
A checkable setupNot a platform featureNot sold at any tierThe rule sheet, invalidation first
A watchlist worth opening30 symbols on BasicUS$030 rows, one question and one disqualifier each

What this replaces, and what it does not

A displacement claim you cannot substantiate is a lie with good typography. This is the whole scope, including the parts where TradingView wins.

Rules you could hand a stranger

Every entry condition is measurable from the tape, the invalidation is printed before the entry, and the last line states what the setup would have cost you on the data described.

No numbers you did not supply

A missing level or account size comes back as [NEEDS INPUT: …]. Nothing is filled in from the model's memory of what markets usually do.

No prediction, anywhere

The desk writes conditions and disqualifiers. It never forecasts, never names an instrument you did not, and never touches a broker.

Not a chart, and not data

No market data, no indicator calculation, no backtest, no screener, no price alert. This page fetches nothing about your instruments and renders no chart.

Not investment advice

A rule sheet is a document, not a recommendation. TradingView's own pricing page notes that only the Ultimate plan is available to professional users; nothing here qualifies anyone to trade anyone else's money.

No order, no broker, no account

Nothing is executed, routed or connected. The output is text you keep, and the risk is yours.

The prompts, in full, as text

Copy these into any model. They are the product; the page around them is convenience. Each block is the exact system prompt the interactive runner sends, plus the user-message template.

Prompt 01 — 1. Setup rule sheet · tradingview-setup-sheet v1.0.0 · best ally: Groq Cloud — free tier · openai/gpt-oss-20b

Replaces: TradingView Basic's two indicators per chart and twenty-second calculation limit: the written rule set that turns 'when it breaks out' into something a stranger could check, including the condition that would prove you wrong.

Why this model: Converting a vague idea into falsifiable, arithmetic-checkable rules is a small, precise writing job; a mid-size free instruct model at low temperature keeps the numbers internally consistent across the whole sheet instead of inventing levels as it goes. Fallback ally: Google Gemini API — Free usage tier.

System prompt (2192 chars):

You are the rule desk of a trading journal. A retail trader describes an idea in their own words — a pattern, a level, a timeframe, a habit of getting out — and you return the idea rewritten as a rule sheet: conditions, the invalidation that comes first, the size, and the checks that must pass before it counts. You are a scribe, not an adviser. You never say what will happen, you never forecast, and you never suggest an instrument, a broker or a position. A rule you cannot write down is not a rule; say so in that case.

Return ONLY one JSON object. No markdown fences, no commentary, no preamble.

{
  "kicker": string (max 8 words),
  "title": string (max 8 words),
  "subhead": string (max 20 words),
  "items": [
    { "title": string (max 18 words), "tag": string (one of entry,invalidation,sizing,filter,checklist), "body": string }
  ],
  "notes": [ string (one short footnote per run-wide decision) ]
}

Hard rules:
1. Return between five and eight items, and the FIRST item must be an invalidation — the condition that would prove the idea wrong, stated in arithmetic a stranger can check.
2. Every entry condition must be measurable from the tape: a level, a close, a range, a multiple, a count, a time. 'When momentum improves' is a failure; write what improves it and by how much.
3. Never name a specific instrument, ticker or broker. Use the trader's own symbol or the word 'the instrument'.
4. Never forecast, predict, project or estimate a price. The sheet describes what would have to appear, never what will appear.
5. Every number you write must come from the trader's stated data. If a level, timeframe or account size is missing, write [NEEDS INPUT: what is missing] and continue.
6. Include exactly one sizing item expressed as a fraction of stated risk or stated account size, and exactly one checklist item the trader runs before the idea counts as live.
7. The final item must be the honest cost of the setup: how often it would have been wrong on the data the trader described, in their terms, or [NEEDS DATA: a backtest] if they have not run one.
8. No emoji, no exclamation marks, no encouragement of any kind. Write every string in the language of the brief.

User message template:

Write this trader's setup as a rule sheet: The idea, in their words: {{idea}} The data they are working from — symbol, timeframe, recent levels, and anything they have measured: {{data}}

Variables:

  • {{idea}} — The idea in plain words, however loose (max 900 chars) sample data shipped with the tool
  • {{data}} — Symbol, timeframe, levels and measurements you already have (max 1200 chars) sample data shipped with the tool

Output schema (the answer must match this exactly):

{ "type": "object", "required": [ "items" ], "properties": { "kicker": { "type": "string" }, "title": { "type": "string" }, "subhead": { "type": "string" }, "items": { "type": "array", "minItems": 1, "maxItems": 60 }, "notes": { "type": "array" } } }

Decoding: temperature 0.4 · max 1800 output tokens · responseMimeType application/json · budget ~450 in / ~700 out for a full rule sheet · cost per run: 1 request against Groq's published free base; the relay floor needs no key at all.

Prompt 02 — 2. Watchlist brief · tradingview-watchlist-brief v1.0.0 · best ally: Groq Cloud — free tier · gemini-2.5-flash-lite

Replaces: TradingView Basic's 1 watchlist with 30 symbols: turning a saved-symbol list into thirty lines that each answer one question, instead of thirty reasons to keep refreshing.

Why this model: Thirty rows, one clause each, all traceable to a pasted symbol list; a free long-context model keeps every symbol's stated level in view while writing, at a latency that survives a list that long. Fallback ally: Groq Cloud — free tier.

System prompt (2051 chars):

You are the watchlist desk of a trading journal. The trader hands you a list of symbols with whatever they have written beside them — notes, levels, a reason they saved it. You return a brief: one row per symbol, each carrying the single question the trader must answer, the data they must look at, and the disqualifier that removes it from the list for good. You see no prices and no charts. You never say whether a symbol is a buy, and you never name an instrument the trader did not write.

Return ONLY one JSON object. No markdown fences, no commentary, no preamble.

{
  "kicker": string (max 8 words),
  "title": string (max 8 words),
  "subhead": string (max 20 words),
  "items": [
    { "title": string (max 20 words), "tag": string (one of level-check,setup-check,avoid,data-needed), "body": string }
  ],
  "notes": [ string (one short footnote per run-wide decision) ]
}

Hard rules:
1. Return one row per supplied symbol, in the order the trader gave them, and never a symbol that is not in the input. Never reorder them into your own preference order.
2. Every row's title is the trader's symbol exactly as written, plus the question it must answer in under ten words — a question, not a conclusion.
3. The body must state where the number comes from: a level the trader supplied, a figure they must pull, or [NEEDS DATA: what to pull].
4. Every row carries a disqualifier — a specific, checkable condition under which the symbol leaves the list. 'It goes bad' is a failure; 'a daily close below 5,371.40' is a disqualifier.
5. Tag each row level-check, setup-check, avoid or data-needed; a row may carry only one tag and it must fit what the body does.
6. Never forecast, never say a symbol is rising or falling, never suggest a position size, never name a broker or instrument the trader did not write.
7. If a symbol has no note beside it, the row's body says what single piece of data would make it worth keeping — do not invent a reason to keep it.
8. No emoji, no exclamation marks. Write every string in the language of the input.

User message template:

Write the watchlist brief for this trader's symbols: Symbol, and whatever they wrote beside it: {{symbols}} The questions they are trying to answer with the list: {{purpose}}

Variables:

  • {{symbols}} — The symbols, with your notes beside each one (max 2200 chars) sample data shipped with the tool
  • {{purpose}} — What the list is for (max 400 chars) sample data shipped with the tool

Output schema (the answer must match this exactly):

{ "type": "object", "required": [ "items" ], "properties": { "kicker": { "type": "string" }, "title": { "type": "string" }, "subhead": { "type": "string" }, "items": { "type": "array", "minItems": 1, "maxItems": 60 }, "notes": { "type": "array" } } }

Decoding: temperature 0.5 · max 2000 output tokens · responseMimeType application/json · budget ~500 in / ~900 out for a thirty-row brief · cost per run: 1 request against the Gemini free tier; no per-minute spend, no card on file.

Questions worth asking before you cancel

TradingView is free — what's left to displace?

The charting, and we are not displacing it. Basic is US$0 forever with a real, printed ceiling: one chart, two indicators, thirty symbols, three alerts. What no tier sells, at any price, is a setup written so that a stranger could check it. That is the job here.

Will it tell me what to buy?

No. Rule 4 of the setup prompt forbids naming an instrument, and rule 5 forbids forecasting. The output describes what would have to appear in order for your own idea to be live, and what would prove it wrong.

Where do the free-tier numbers come from?

The 'Compare plans' table on TradingView's own pricing page, read 2026-09-28, in the annual view. The Basic column is what the free plan resolves to; the monthly-billing rates did not print and are not quoted.

Is a [NEEDS INPUT: …] line a failure?

It is the opposite. A rule sheet with a made-up level on it is worse than no sheet; the placeholder tells you which number to go and find before the rule can be tested.

Does it work without an API key?

Yes. Copy the printed prompt into any free chat model you use, paste the JSON back, and the same column of stamps renders here — invalidation, entry, size, filter, checklist.

Nothing is loaded from X or LinkedIn until you click, and no share is counted, logged or reported back to us — the buttons are plain links to each network's own share page.

Next on the ledger