Skip to main content
Glama

Agent Einstein — Crypto & Market Intelligence

Hyperliquid Whale Positioning

get_hyperliquid_whales
Read-onlyIdempotent

Consensus positioning of the largest Hyperliquid perp traders plus current funding rates — i.e. what big leveraged money is actually long or short, and what it costs to hold that side. A coin held by fewer than 3 of the read whales is reported NEUTRAL whatever its long/short split (one whale is 100% of the traders holding a coin, which is not a consensus), and any whale accounts that could not be read this pass are reported rather than counted as flat.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum rows to return (1-25).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoRow cap applied to every list in this payload.
reasonNoWhy the payload is absent, when `available` is false.
whalesNoWhale positioning: the consensus read, the bullish/bearish assets and the traders behind it.
fundingNoPerp funding rates, their extremes, divergences and momentum.
availableNoFalse when this call has no data — a snapshot that is not warm yet, a domain switched off, or an argument that was rejected. NOT an error, and NOT a statement about the market.
fetchedAtNoPer-leg refresh times — positioning and funding age independently.
truncatedNoPresent only when a list was cut to `limit`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "available": {
      +      "description": "False when this call has no data — a snapshot that is not warm yet, a domain switched off, or an argument that was rejected. NOT an error, and NOT a statement about the market.",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "fetchedAt": {
      +      "additionalProperties": true,
      +      "description": "Per-leg refresh times — positioning and funding age independently."
      +    },
      +    "funding": {
      +      "additionalProperties": true,
      +      "description": "Perp funding rates, their extremes, divergences and momentum.",
      +      "properties": {
      +        "available": {
      +          "description": "False when the funding leg could not be read."
      +        },
      +        "divergences": {
      +          "description": "Assets whose funding disagrees across venues.",
      +          "items": {},
      +          "type": "array"
      +        },
      +        "extremes": {
      +          "additionalProperties": true,
      +          "description": "Most positive and most negative funding."
      +        },
      +        "marketRegime": {
      +          "description": "Regime implied by funding across the book."
      +        },
      +        "opportunities": {
      +          "description": "Funding-carry candidates.",
      +          "items": {},
      +          "type": "array"
      +        },
      +        "rates": {
      +          "additionalProperties": true,
      +          "description": "Funding rate per asset."
      +        }
      +      }
      +    },
      +    "limit": {
      +      "description": "Row cap applied to every list in this payload.",
      +      "type": "number"
      +    },
      +    "reason": {
      +      "description": "Why the payload is absent, when `available` is false.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "truncated": {
      +      "additionalProperties": true,
      +      "description": "Present only when a list was cut to `limit`.",
      +      "properties": {
      +        "limit": {
      +          "description": "The cap that was applied.",
      +          "type": "number"
      +        },
      +        "originalLengths": {
      +          "additionalProperties": true,
      +          "description": "Field name → its full length before the cut."
      +        }
      +      }
      +    },
      +    "whales": {
      +      "additionalProperties": true,
      +      "description": "Whale positioning: the consensus read, the bullish/bearish assets and the traders behind it.",
      +      "properties": {
      +        "available": {
      +          "description": "False when the positioning leg could not be read."
      +        },
      +        "bearishAssets": {
      +          "description": "Assets the cohort is net short.",
      +          "items": {},
      +          "type": "array"
      +        },
      +        "bullishAssets": {
      +          "description": "Assets the cohort is net long.",
      +          "items": {},
      +          "type": "array"
      +        },
      +        "consensus": {
      +          "description": "Net directional read across the traders."
      +        },
      +        "topTraders": {
      +          "description": "The traders behind the read.",
      +          "items": {},
      +          "type": "array"
      +        },
      +        "tradersAnalyzed": {
      +          "description": "Traders actually read."
      +        },
      +        "tradersRequested": {
      +          "description": "Traders the pass tried to read — a gap means partial coverage."
      +        },
      +        "whalePositions": {
      +          "description": "Individual positions.",
      +          "items": {},
      +          "type": "array"
      +        }
      +      }
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds valuable non-obvious semantics: coins with fewer than 3 read whales are forced to NEUTRAL, and unread whale accounts are reported rather than treated as flat. This meaningfully goes beyond the annotation safety profile and prevents incorrect interpretation of the data.

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?

The description is well front-loaded with the main purpose before diving into caveats. The caveat about the 3-whale consensus threshold and unread accounts is dense but necessary; it is slightly heavy in parenthetical detail, preventing a perfect score.

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?

For a low-complexity tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers everything needed to invoke it correctly: scope, the meaning of consensus, the NEUTRAL rule, and handling of unread accounts. Return structure can be left to the existing output schema.

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?

The only parameter, limit, is already fully documented in the input schema with a default and range, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add parameter-specific semantics, but with full schema coverage the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 resource (largest Hyperliquid perp traders), the data produced (consensus positioning plus funding rates), and the core concept (what big leveraged money is long/short and what it costs to hold). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_polymarket_whales or track_whales by naming the exchange, asset class, and funding component.

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?

The context for use is clear: it is for Hyperliquid perpetual positioning and funding rates. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions, such as 'for Polymarket use get_polymarket_whales'. Usage is implied rather than directly guided.

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.