Which Sources Support Technical Claims
TradingView documentation is the reference for alert generation, Pine behavior and webhook delivery. Broker and exchange documentation establishes their order interfaces and account constraints. A connector’s own documentation can establish what that connector advertises or documents, but does not independently prove its speed, reliability or compatibility with every account.
Sources appear beside the relevant passages and in the source list on each guide. Provider-specific statements retain their scope: a restriction in a native exchange bot does not automatically apply to every API connection to that exchange. The webhook guide demonstrates this distinction between a delivery format and a receiver’s trading instructions.
When a claim relies on an automation vendor’s official documentation, the source may be linked by its neutral document title with a nofollow attribute. Such a reference supports the stated claim; it is not an endorsement or independent performance evidence. Comparisons distinguish documented capabilities from behavior that still needs an account-specific test.
How Account Rules and Prices Are Checked
A prop-firm rule is read in the context of its program, account stage, platform and execution location. A general permission to use algorithms is not extended to cloud hosting or a different funded-account stage without supporting language. The prop firm guide records the scope and review date with its rule summaries.
Prices are attached to the plan and billing period described by the source. A route-specific subscription is not presented as the total cost of every connection. Hosting, charting, data and API access may be separate costs, as explained in the comparison guide.
When documentation is ambiguous or two sources disagree, the unresolved point should remain explicit. A successful connection or a vendor tutorial cannot override the account provider’s current rules. Readers should check the linked official rule before acting on a time-sensitive statement.
What a Review Date Means
“Reviewed” identifies the date the guide’s cited material and factual wording were checked for that edition. It does not mean every possible account was tested, that the providers endorsed the guide, or that the information is monitored continuously.
Publication and substantive modification dates describe the article, while a date beside a price or rule describes that particular check. A formatting change, a new preview image or a routine rebuild does not constitute a fresh factual review. Dates should advance only for the work they actually describe.
How Forum Reports Are Used
Forums and Reddit help identify questions worth answering, such as why chart trades and alert logs disagree or why an order remains after a position closes. They establish that a user raised a question; they do not establish the cause of the incident or how often it occurs.
The guides label these reports as discussion examples and use primary documentation for explanations of platform behavior. An account of one failed trade is not converted into a universal claim about a service. The Pine Script guide keeps this distinction when discussing historical trades and realtime alerts.
Delivery, Acceptance and Fill
HTTP delivery records that a message reached its receiver. Order acceptance records that a broker or exchange accepted an instruction. A fill records actual execution, including filled quantity and price. These are separate events: an accepted limit order may remain unfilled, and a delivered webhook can still lead to a rejected order. The execution guide uses separate records for each stage.
Tests, Examples and Diagrams
The current guides are documentation-based. They do not present original live execution tests or comparative latency benchmarks. Worked calculations and invented timelines are labeled as examples. Editorial diagrams explain relationships already described in the text; they are not screenshots or measurements from a trading account.
A result is described as a test only after the test has actually been performed. A useful execution test records the account environment, symbol, settings, timestamps, submitted instructions and resulting order state. A latency comparison also needs a defined start and end, clock alignment, sample size and failures. Paper results are kept separate from live execution.
Corrections and Version Changes
A correction should identify the affected statement, check the relevant primary source and change the passage and its supporting reference together. Related tables, examples and machine-readable citations must be checked for the same error. Material changes to account permissions, price scope or execution instructions warrant a dated explanation near the corrected material.
The issue to document is concrete: the page URL, the disputed sentence, the relevant product or account stage and the evidence that contradicts it. This site does not currently offer a public correction form. No response time or continuous monitoring service is promised.
Machine-Readable Content
The complete guides, source lists and navigation are available in HTML without JavaScript. Structured data describes the visible content and does not add fictional authors, organizations or test results. The optional machine-readable navigation file lists the guides and summarizes this sourcing approach.
That file is an additional navigation aid, not a guarantee of search ranking or citation by an AI assistant. Google’s guidance says that its AI search features do not require special AI markup or a new machine-readable file. [S24]
Sources & further reading
Official documentation supports the technical claims. Community discussions illustrate user questions, not verified product behavior. Rules and account terms can change. How sources and reviews are handled.