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). Keyless serves the free pairs without cascade chains; an active developer 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. 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.

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.
`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 developer 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.

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 false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it is modeled from leverage assumptions, is clearly labeled as a projection, and provides 'descriptive market data only.' It also exposes plan-dependent limitations, which is useful for setting expectations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and efficiently packs essential details about projection nature and plan tiers. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or repetition.

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?

Given the output schema and rich annotations, the description is complete enough for selection. It covers what the tool does, its limitations, and the meaning of free vs. developer plan access, which is adequate among 27 sibling tools.

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%, with each parameter (coin and pair) already well-documented, including plan behavior in the pair description. The description itself adds no additional parameter-level semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 identifies the tool as a projected liquidation level book for one pair, explicitly distinguishing it from executed trades and actual liquidation feeds. It provides a specific resource and scope, and the phrase 'projected' plus 'not executed trades' separates it from siblings like liquidations or market_liquidations.

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?

Clear context is provided: use this tool for projected liquidation levels for one pair, with plan-based limitations (keyless free pairs without cascade chains, active developer plan full snapshot). However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it lacks the explicit exclusions needed for a 5.

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

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Many tools share the same broad purpose domains, such as market_digest vs market_overview vs market_snapshot and whale_context vs whale_profile vs whale_flow, making selection genuinely ambiguous for an agent. The long descriptions help separate them, but the sheer number of overlapping 'one-call' market and whale views still invites misselection, and whale_tape is a direct duplicate alias.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names are consistently snake_case and mostly follow a clear domain-prefix pattern: market_*, whale_*, hl_*, defi_*. Minor deviations like liquidations vs market_liquidations, liq_zones, my_access, and the deprecated whale_tape keep it from a perfect score, but the overall convention is predictable and readable.

Tool Count2/5

With 30 tools, the server exceeds the reasonable upper bound and feels heavy even for a broad data domain. Many tools could be consolidated—for instance, several one-call market summary tools and multiple whale-flow variants—without losing capability.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers an impressively wide range of whale and market data: news, liquidations, funding, DEX activity, Hyperliquid wallets, market scans, history, and plan access. There are minor gaps such as no general price/OHLC history or per-wallet trade history beyond swaps and fills, but agents can work around these using the existing surface.

Resources

Need Help?