whoami
Read-only
Show the current session's plan, rate limits, history window, and coin access (reflects keyless demo vs. your API key).
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
DepthFeed
TDQS
A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly and openWorld hints; description adds specifics (plan, rate limits, history window, coin access) and notes keyless demo distinction, providing useful context beyond annotations.
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?
Single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; every part adds value.
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?
No output schema, but description fully explains return values (plan, rate limits, etc.) and no additional context needed. Complete for a zero-parameter tool.
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?
No parameters (baseline 4 per rules). Schema coverage is 100%, description adds meaning by listing what the tool shows.
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?
Description clearly states verb 'show' and resource 'current session's plan, rate limits, history window, and coin access', distinguishing it from all sibling tools which are market-related.
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?
Context is clear (check session info), but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives; however, siblings are unrelated so confusion is minimal.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a distinct purpose, clearly separated by venue prefix (kalshi_, limitless_, polymarket_) and action (get_orderbook, get_snapshots, search_markets). The screener and whoami tools are unique and not overlapping with any other tool.
Naming Consistency4/5
Most tools follow the venue_verb_noun pattern (e.g., kalshi_get_orderbook, polymarket_get_snapshots). However, polymarket_all_markets uses 'all' instead of a verb, and screener/whoami deviate entirely from the pattern, causing minor inconsistency.
Tool Count5/5
With 12 tools covering three venues plus cross-venue and session info, the count is well-scoped. Each tool serves a clear role without unnecessary bloat or deficiency.
Completeness4/5
The tool surface covers the core data retrieval operations (orderbook, snapshots, search, single market) for all venues. Missing are update/delete operations but those are outside the data provider scope. A minor gap is the lack of a dedicated 'get_market' for Kalshi and Limitless, though search_markets provides similar info.