FortFi Treasury MCP

propose_hyperliquid_deposit

Propose moving HyperEVM USDC into Hyperliquid perp margin (top up). Set perpDex for HIP-3 desks (xyz, io, para). Returns proposalId; execute with confirm_proposal (server-side when Delegated Access or agent credential).

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": {
      "walletId": "<walletId>",
      "amountUsd": "<amountUsd>"
    },
    "name": "propose_hyperliquid_deposit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`perpDex`	No	core \| xyz \| io \| para (default core)
`walletId`	Yes
`amountUsd`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the load and does so reasonably: it discloses that this only creates a proposal returning proposalId, that execution happens via confirm_proposal, and that confirmation can be server-side when Delegated Access or an agent credential is present. It does not cover whether funds are reserved at proposal time, proposal expiry, or required permissions for the proposing caller.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and ending with the execution path; no filler. Dense jargon ('HIP-3 desks') and the '(top up)' parenthetical cost a little readability but nothing is redundant.

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?

For a 3-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the return value and the two-step propose/confirm lifecycle, which is valuable. It still leaves the amount format, wallet semantics, and any failure/precondition behavior undocumented, so it is adequate rather than complete.

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 coverage is only 33%: perpDex is documented in the schema and reinforced by the description naming HIP-3 desks (xyz, io, para). walletId and amountUsd are unexplained in both places, leaving the agent to guess which wallet is debited and whether amountUsd is a decimal string with any minimum or precision constraints.

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 pair: moving HyperEVM USDC into Hyperliquid perp margin as a top-up, framed as a proposal. An agent can distinguish it from propose_hyperliquid_withdraw or propose_hyperliquid_perp_open, though the description never explicitly contrasts with the close sibling propose_hyperliquid_spot_to_perp.

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 ('top up' perp margin) and the follow-up step is spelled out as confirm_proposal, plus a conditional hint to set perpDex for HIP-3 desks. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance or routing sentence naming the sibling to use for related flows (e.g. spot-to-perp, withdrawal), so the agent must infer the boundary.

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

All FortFi Treasury MCP 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?