Skip to main content
Glama

Hundo

by finance.hundo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

propose_asset_trade

Propose a buy or sell trade for an asset. Returns a proposal id; to record it, call the confirm_proposal tool with the returned proposalId after the user approves (there is no UI button or proposal card to click in this context). To buy an asset the user does not hold yet, pass newAsset instead of assetId: confirming creates the asset and records the buy together. For sells, validates the user holds enough quantity. The cash account currency must match priceCurrency. Always include a short user-supplied description; optionally include a categoryId.

MCP note: this tool only CREATES a pending proposal; nothing is recorded until confirm_proposal is called.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYesYYYY-MM-DD.
feesNoTransaction fees in MAJOR units (e.g. 1.99 for $1.99, 5000 for Rp 5,000). Pass 0 if none.
actionYes
assetIdNoId of the asset being traded, from getAssets. Omit it only for a buy of an asset the user does not hold yet, and pass newAsset instead.
newAssetNoPass this INSTEAD of an asset id, only when getAssets shows the user does not hold the asset yet. Confirming the proposal creates the asset and records the trade together.
quantityYesNumber of units to buy or sell.
categoryIdNoOptional category id to attach to the cash transaction.
descriptionYesShort user-supplied description, e.g. 'DCA into AAPL'.
pricePerUnitYesPer-unit price in MAJOR units (the displayed amount, e.g. 180.25 for $180.25, 3123.98 for Rp 3,123.98). Fractional values are allowed (e.g. 0.000001 for high-supply crypto). The server scales to storage units; never pre-multiply by 100.
cashAccountIdNoId of the cash account funding or receiving this trade. Omit only in the email-import pipeline when the source email doesn't make it clear which cash account is involved - the user picks one via the Edit button. In chat, always pass a real id. Do not pass an empty string; omit the field entirely instead.
priceCurrencyYes3-letter currency code for the trade price.
editsProposalIdNoId of an existing pending proposal to update in place. Pass this when the user asks to modify a proposal you previously made (e.g. 'make it $50 instead'). Look up current ids with listPendingProposals if you're unsure. Omit when proposing something new.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / assetId / description
      Previous value: -"Id of the asset being traded."New value: +"Id of the asset being traded, from getAssets. Omit it only for a buy of an asset the user does not hold yet, and pass newAsset instead."
    • addedInput schema / properties / assetId / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / newAsset
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pass this INSTEAD of an asset id, only when getAssets shows the user does not hold the asset yet. Confirming the proposal creates the asset and records the trade together.",
+  "properties": {
+    "symbol": {
+      "description": "For crypto and stock: the ticker, e.g. \"SOL\" or \"AAPL\" (use the exchange suffix for a non-US listing, e.g. \"BBCA.JK\"). For commodity: \"gold\", \"silver\", \"platinum\" or \"palladium\". For every other type: a short name the user will recognize, e.g. \"Honda Civic 2021\".",
+      "maxLength": 100,
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "description": "crypto, stock (shares, ETFs and funds), commodity (gold, silver, platinum, palladium), real_estate, vehicle, bond or other.",
+      "enum": [
+        "crypto",
+        "stock",
+        "commodity",
+        "real_estate",
+        "vehicle",
+        "bond",
+        "other"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "unit": {
+      "description": "Commodity only, and then required: the unit the quantity is in - toz (troy ounce), g or kg. The price per unit must be in the same unit.",
+      "enum": [
+        "toz",
+        "g",
+        "kg"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "valuationMode": {
+      "description": "Omit it. \"auto\" (the default for crypto, stock and commodity) follows the market price. Pass \"manual\" only when the user says the asset has no market price, e.g. shares in a private company; its value is then the price paid until the user updates it.",
+      "enum": [
+        "auto",
+        "manual"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "type",
+    "symbol"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "action",
-  "assetId",
-  "quantity",
-  "pricePerUnit",
-  "priceCurrency",
-  "date",
-  "description"
-]New value: +[
+  "action",
+  "quantity",
+  "pricePerUnit",
+  "priceCurrency",
+  "date",
+  "description"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / cashAccountId / description
      Previous value: -"Id of the cash account funding or receiving this trade. Omit only in the email-import pipeline when the source email doesn't make it clear which cash account is involved — the user picks one via the Edit button. In chat, always pass a real id. Do not pass an empty string; omit the field entirely instead."New value: +"Id of the cash account funding or receiving this trade. Omit only in the email-import pipeline when the source email doesn't make it clear which cash account is involved - the user picks one via the Edit button. In chat, always pass a real id. Do not pass an empty string; omit the field entirely instead."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-readOnly, non-idempotent write with destructiveHint=false, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: nothing is recorded until confirm_proposal runs, sells are validated against held quantity, confirming a newAsset buy also creates the asset, and the cash account currency must match priceCurrency. These are cross-field and lifecycle traits annotations cannot express.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then the confirm step, then parameter branching, then constraints – a logical order with no filler sentences. It is dense and runs slightly long for a single paragraph, but every sentence carries information the agent needs.

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 12-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the two-phase lifecycle, the new-asset branch, and a key cross-field constraint, and it names the single return value (proposalId). It stops short of mentioning the related listPendingProposals lookup or how a created proposal is later surfaced.

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 already 92%, so the baseline of 3 applies, but the description adds genuine cross-parameter meaning beyond the schema: the assetId-versus-newAsset branch rule, the priceCurrency/cash-account currency constraint, and the requirement that description be user-supplied. It does not, however, explain editsProposalId, fees, or categoryId workflow.

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?

States a specific verb ('Propose') and resource ('a buy or sell trade for an asset') and immediately distinguishes itself from confirm_proposal by declaring that it only creates a pending proposal. An agent can tell it apart from siblings like propose_transaction or propose_asset_convert without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit routing conditions: call confirm_proposal with the returned proposalId after user approval, pass newAsset instead of assetId when the user does not hold the asset, and use assetId otherwise. It also warns that there is no UI button or proposal card, which is a real usage constraint an agent would otherwise have to infer.

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

All Hundo toolsInspect
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