Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

chaink9

by com.chaink9
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

simulate-trade

Read-only

Execute a requested-wallet buy or sell on a disposable fork of BNB Smart Chain, Ethereum, Base or Arc. Trades the token's market as a scan finds it: its deepest funded V2 pair or V3 pool, else its recorded Uniswap V4 pool (hook included), against BNB/WBNB or ETH/WETH; actual wallet balances, EOA wallets only. Returns receipt status, received amount, the market traded (pool_version, pool, fee_tier, hooks), router quote shortfall and gas. A V4 quote already includes the hook's cut. A quote shortfall is not a pure tax or price-impact measurement. Sell approval is simulated when needed; no live transaction is sent. Costs $0.02 per successful call in USDC on Base, Polygon, Arbitrum, Avalanche, BNB Smart Chain (USDT) or Solana, paid with x402 in the call's _meta; failed calls are free.

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": {
      "token": "<token>",
      "wallet": "<wallet>",
      "direction": "<direction>",
      "amount": "<amount>"
    },
    "name": "simulate-trade"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainNobsc (BNB Smart Chain, the default), eth (Ethereum) or base (Base)
tokenYesToken
amountYesInput base units: native coin wei (BNB or ETH) for buys, token base units for sells
walletYesWallet being tested; may differ from payer
directionYes
minimum_outNoOptional minimum received in output base units; defaults to zero

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only supply readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, yet the description adds substantial behavior: execution on a disposable fork, no live transaction sent, sell approval simulated, EOA wallets only, and explicit x402 pricing ($0.02 per successful call, failed calls free, paid in _meta on six chains). It also pre-empts a likely misinterpretation by warning that a quote shortfall is not a pure tax or price-impact figure.

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 purpose, then environment, then return shape, then pricing — a sensible order with no filler sentences. It is dense with protocol jargon (V4 hooks, quote shortfall, x402) in a few long clauses, which costs a bit of scannability, but every sentence carries information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description carries the return burden and does so: receipt status, received amount, market (pool_version, pool, fee_tier, hooks), router quote shortfall, and gas. Pricing, payment chain, and failure economics are covered. Minor residual gaps: what 'quote shortfall' numerically represents and any latency/concurrency expectations for fork execution.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is already 83%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: buys are priced against BNB/WBNB or ETH/WETH, the wallet is the tested wallet and 'may differ from payer', trading assumes actual wallet balances, and V4 quotes include the hook's cut. It does not clarify minimum_out' zero-default behavior or the amount unit trade-offs beyond what the schema already says.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Execute a requested-wallet buy or sell') plus the execution environment (disposable fork of BSC/ETH/Base/Arc) and the market-selection rule (deepest funded V2 pair, else V3 pool, else recorded V4 pool with hook). This is far more than a restatement of the name. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'transaction-preview', which an agent could plausibly confuse with a fork-based simulation.

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: 'Trades the token's market as a scan finds it' ties it loosely to the scan tools, and 'no live transaction is sent' signals this is pre-trade testing. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no named alternative (e.g. transaction-preview vs. this fork simulation), leaving routing to inference.

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

All chaink9 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