whale-data

Projected liquidation levels

liq_zones

Read-onlyIdempotent

Projected liquidation level book for one pair (modeled from leverage assumptions - clearly labeled as a projection, not executed trades). The free plans get BTC without cascade chains and a headline for any other coin; an active paid plan serves any pair with the full snapshot. Descriptive market data only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`coin`	No	Alias for pair.
`pair`	No	Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. The free plans get BTC's projected levels without the cascade chains and a headline for any other coin; a paid plan reaches any streamed pair with the full snapshot.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	One line saying what the numbers cover, or why there are none. Read it before reporting any zero as a market reading.
`pair`	No	The pair this projection covers.
`covered`	No	False when this server does not stream the pair at all. No plan adds it.
`warming`	No	True when the projection is not built yet for this pair. Asking started it. Not a wall, and not a claim that the pair has no liquidation levels.
`available`	No	False when this lane could not answer: a producer is dark, the pair sits outside this plan, or the argument named something we do not carry. Absent or true means the numbers are a real reading, not a guess.
`free_pairs`	No	The pairs a keyless connection can read, returned when the pair asked for is not one of them.
`projection`	No	The projected levels: where forced closes would sit under the modeled leverage assumptions, plus the cascade chains on a paid plan. Modeled levels, NOT trades that happened.
`access_note`	No	What this connection could not return and what lifts it. Always pass this on to the user: it is the only place that information appears.
`retry_after_seconds`	No	How long to wait before asking again when warming is true.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 15, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / pair / description

Previous value: -"Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. Keyless calls reach the free pairs and get the projected levels without the cascade chains; a paid plan reaches any streamed pair with the full snapshot."New value: +"Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. The free plans get BTC's projected levels without the cascade chains and a headline for any other coin; a paid plan reaches any streamed pair with the full snapshot."

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 7, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / retry_after_seconds

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "How long to wait before asking again when warming is true."
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / warming

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "True when the projection is not built yet for this pair. Asking started it. Not a wall, and not a claim that the pair has no liquidation levels."
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 2, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / pair / description

Previous value: -"Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. Keyless calls reach the free pairs and get the projected levels without the cascade chains; a developer plan reaches any streamed pair with the full snapshot."New value: +"Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. Keyless calls reach the free pairs and get the projected levels without the cascade chains; a paid plan reaches any streamed pair with the full snapshot."

changedOutput schema / properties / projection / description

Previous value: -"The projected levels: where forced closes would sit under the modeled leverage assumptions, plus the cascade chains on a developer plan. Modeled levels, NOT trades that happened."New value: +"The projected levels: where forced closes would sit under the modeled leverage assumptions, plus the cascade chains on a paid plan. Modeled levels, NOT trades that happened."

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 13, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / pair / description

Added value: +"Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. Keyless calls reach the free pairs and get the projected levels without the cascade chains; a developer plan reaches any streamed pair with the full snapshot."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "access_note": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "What this connection could not return and what lifts it. Always pass this on to the user: it is the only place that information appears."
+    },
+    "available": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "False when this lane could not answer: a producer is dark, the pair sits outside this plan, or the argument named something we do not carry. Absent or true means the numbers are a real reading, not a guess."
+    },
+    "covered": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "False when this server does not stream the pair at all. No plan adds it."
+    },
+    "free_pairs": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "The pairs a keyless connection can read, returned when the pair asked for is not one of them."
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "One line saying what the numbers cover, or why there are none. Read it before reporting any zero as a market reading."
+    },
+    "pair": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "The pair this projection covers."
+    },
+    "projection": {
+      "description": "The projected levels: where forced closes would sit under the modeled leverage assumptions, plus the cascade chains on a developer plan. Modeled levels, NOT trades that happened."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description does not need to repeat those. The description adds valuable context about the projection nature ('not executed trades'), plan-specific behavior (free gets BTC without cascade chains; paid gets full snapshot), and 'Descriptive market data only'. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand expected behavior and limitations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is three sentences with no waste. It front-loads the core purpose and adds plan constraints in the final sentence. Every sentence earns its place, and it is highly efficient for the information conveyed.

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?

The tool is simple with two optional parameters and an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. It adequately covers the purpose, scope, and plan limitations. For a read-only, idempotent tool, nothing critical is missing; an agent can call it correctly with the given description.

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%, so both parameters are fully documented in the schema, including the default behavior and alias handling. The description repeats some of this (e.g., plan differences) but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is correct because the schema already carries the parameter semantics effectively.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool provides a 'projected liquidation level book for one pair', specifically distinguishes it as a projection rather than executed trades, and notes it is 'Descriptive market data only'. This is a specific verb+resource with clear scope, and it differentiates from other liquidation tools by emphasizing projection and single-pair focus.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear context about when this tool is appropriate: for projected levels on one pair, with plan-based limitations (free vs paid). It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the 'projection' and 'one pair' nature implies when it should be used relative to other tools. This is clear context without explicit exclusions, so a 4 is appropriate.

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

All whale-data tools Inspect

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

Need Help?