FortFi Treasury MCP

update_strategy

Resize a strategy or copy trade: raise or lower its leverage (offered levels only) or allocation cap. Moving into a high-risk level needs acceptHighRisk: true. The loss cap can be added or lowered, never raised or removed (OWNER_PASSKEY_REQUIRED).

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "walletId": "<walletId>"
    },
    "name": "update_strategy"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes
`leverage`	No	New leverage (higher or lower)
`walletId`	Yes
`autoStops`	No	Copy trades only: keep a full-size stop on every copied position (on by default). API keys may turn it on, never off.
`maxLossPct`	No	New loss cap, whole percent. API keys may add a cap or lower it, never raise or remove it.
`acceptHighRisk`	No	Required when the new leverage is a high-risk level you have not already accepted.
`maxAllocationUsd`	No	New allocation cap in USD (higher or lower), e.g. "800"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / autoStops

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Copy trades only: keep a full-size stop on every copied position (on by default). API keys may turn it on, never off.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden well: it discloses that leverage must be an offered level, that acceptHighRisk:true is required for high-risk levels, that the loss cap can never be raised or removed, and that an owner passkey is required. It does not explain what happens to open positions when resizing or what the response contains, which is a remaining gap.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the guard conditions, then the irreversible restriction. Each sentence carries a distinct constraint and there is no filler.

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?

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the risky operations and permission requirements adequately. The main omissions are return behavior and the effect of resizing on live positions, which an agent might want before committing.

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 71%, and the description adds meaning beyond it: 'offered levels only' for leverage, the directional rule for maxLossPct, and the acceptHighRisk gating condition. It does not mention id/walletId or the copy-trade-only nature of autoStops (covered by the schema), so it complements rather than repeats.

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 ('Resize a strategy or copy trade') and enumerates the mutable fields (leverage, allocation cap, loss cap). It does not explicitly name sibling tools such as start_strategy or stop_strategy, but the scope is unambiguous enough to separate it from them.

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 by the constraints: use it to raise/lower leverage or allocation, or to add/lower a loss cap. There is no explicit when-to-use framing that points to alternatives (e.g., pause_strategy, get_strategy) or states what happens to a running strategy.

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?