Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Kellian

by app.kellian
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Read the lifecycle of a signed trade intent

kellian_get_trade_intent
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check what happened to a signed trade intent: whether it was accepted, which transaction the protocol broadcast for it, and how it ended. MINED means the trade happened and the position is yours; CONFIRMED means its block is finalized and settlement can no longer be reorganised away. FAILED, EXPIRED and ABANDONED mean nothing was spent — the signed price and deadline are enforced before any gas is committed. Also returns selfSubmit: the exact router call for submitting the intent yourself if the protocol relayer is ever unavailable.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "digest": "<digest>"
    },
    "name": "kellian_get_trade_intent"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
digestYesThe digest returned by problee_execute_trade_intent.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent and non-destructive, so the description's job is to add semantics, which it does richly: it defines MINED vs CONFIRMED (finality), explains that FAILED/EXPIRED/ABANDONED cost no gas because price and deadline are enforced pre-broadcast, and discloses the selfSubmit fallback field. That is genuine behavioral context an agent could not derive from the annotations or the single-parameter schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the outcome question, then the status glossary, then the selfSubmit note; each sentence carries information. It is denser than strictly needed for a one-parameter read, but none of the wording is filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter, read-only lookup with full schema coverage, annotations and an output schema, nothing essential is missing. The description goes beyond the minimum by explaining terminal states and the manual-submission fallback, which is exactly the context needed to interpret the response.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and there is only one parameter, whose description already ties digest to problee_execute_trade_intent. The tool description says nothing further about the digest format or how to obtain it, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Check what happened to a signed trade intent,' and narrows it to lifecycle outcome plus the broadcast transaction. It clearly describes a read of intent state, unlike the mutation sibling kellian_execute_trade_intent. However, it never distinguishes itself from the nearby kellian_get_trade_status or kellian_get_transaction_status, so an agent cannot tell from the description alone which of those to pick.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the reader infers this is the follow-up to submitting an intent, and the schema's digest description ties it to problee_execute_trade_intent. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use clause, and no mention of when to prefer kellian_get_trade_status instead.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Kellian toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources