get_perp_pricesLive perpetual futures from Hyperliquid and trade.xyz (HIP-3 equity perps like XYZ100): price, 24h change, funding rate, open interest, 24h volume. Optional coin filter (e.g. BTC, ETH, XYZ100). Real-time, free.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| coin | No | Optional coin or market filter |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: data is live/real-time, free, and includes specific return fields. It also clarifies the scope of the data (Hyperliquid and trade.xyz equity perps), which helps set expectations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, information-dense sentence that front-loads the core purpose (live perpetual futures), then lists sources, data fields, and filtering option. Every word earns its place; no fluff or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it lists the returned metrics, the data sources, and a filtering example. Minor missing details include default behavior when no coin is provided and the response format, but these are not critical given the low complexity and strong annotations.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema already fully describes the single optional 'coin' parameter with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by giving concrete examples (BTC, ETH, XYZ100) and mentioning 'market filter', which enriches the meaning of the parameter beyond the schema's generic 'Optional coin or market filter' text.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb implied by the tool name to retrieve live perpetual futures data, and explicitly names the data sources (Hyperliquid, trade.xyz) and the exact metrics returned (price, 24h change, funding rate, open interest, 24h volume). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_price or get_prediction_markets.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage when perpetual futures data is needed and explains the optional coin filter with examples, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_price or get_fx_rates. Usage context is implied rather than spelled out, and no exclusions or alternative routing guidance is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool addresses a distinct data domain: FX rates, perpetual futures, portfolio summary, open positions, prediction markets, and general prices. There is minor potential overlap between get_price and get_perp_prices for crypto assets, but the distinction between spot/current price and perpetual futures is clear enough.
All tool names follow a consistent get_<resource> pattern in snake_case. Some resources are plural and some singular, but that is natural given the noun being fetched, so the naming is predictable and uniform.
Six tools is a well-scoped set for a market data and portfolio monitoring server. Each tool provides a distinct, useful capability without unnecessary bloat or an overly thin surface.
The server exposes only getter operations: no order placement, cancellation, position closing, or historical account activity. Given the broker/paper trading context implied by the server name and portfolio tools, the lack of any trading lifecycle actions is a significant gap.