YourAITools MCP Hub

SmartPerps: Live Hyperliquid account profile

hyperliquid_wallet

Read-onlyIdempotent

Same as GET, POST {"address":"0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000001"}

[SmartPerps via YourAITools MCP Hub] No free tier (paid route only). Paid: wallet $0.01 per call, with a credits key (Authorization: Bearer yatc_...) or x402 (USDC; the hub returns the payment terms). Failed tool calls aren't charged: credits are refunded automatically and x402 payments only settle on success.

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": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "hyperliquid_wallet"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tier`	No	Paid tier: wallet $0.01. Default wallet.
`address`	Yes	Hyperliquid account address (0x + 40 hex)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 30, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / address / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  "0xdfc24b077bc1425ad1dea75bcb6f8158e10df303"
+]
```
First observedOct 24, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, idempotent=true, non-destructive, openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-structured context: it is a paid-only route at $0.01 per call, accepts either an Authorization Bearer credits key or x402 USDC payment, and failed calls are refunded/never settled. That is real behavioral value beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The pricing/auth paragraph is dense and earns its place, but the leading "Same as GET, POST {...}" line uses a placeholder all-zeros address that could mislead an agent and duplicates information already in the tier enum. The structure is reasonably front-loaded but the opening line is wasted space.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Payment and auth mechanics are fully spelled out, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, there is no output schema and the description never says what a 'profile' returns (balances, positions, margin?), leaving an agent unable to judge result usefulness before paying.

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%: address has a format note and example, and tier is an enum defaulting to wallet with its price stated. The description adds nothing about parameter behavior, so baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The body text "Same as GET, POST {"address":"0x..."}" is a cryptic restatement of the HTTP shape rather than a description of what the tool does. Only the title ("Live Hyperliquid account profile") conveys the verb+resource, and nothing distinguishes it from address-oriented siblings like check_counterparty or screen_address.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to use this versus alternatives, no prerequisites beyond payment, and no exclusions. The only routing-adjacent content is "No free tier (paid route only)", which is pricing, not usage guidance.

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

All YourAITools MCP Hub tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?