get_market_contextUnified intelligence snapshot for any topic, asset, or keyword: all matching Polymarket and HIP-4 prediction markets combined with live Hyperliquid perp data (price, funding, OI). One call replaces 3+ separate lookups.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Topic, asset, or keyword to look up — e.g. "BTC", "Iran", "Fed rate cut", "Trump" |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds behavioral context by specifying the data sources combined (prediction markets and perp data) and that it is a snapshot. No contradictions.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No extraneous information. Efficiently communicates value.
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?
With one parameter, no output schema, and rich sibling tools, the description sufficiently explains the tool's function and when to use it. Covers the needed completeness for an agent.
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?
Only one parameter (query) with schema description already providing examples. Tool description reinforces that query should be a broad topic, but does not add significant new meaning beyond schema.
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?
Clearly states it provides a unified snapshot combining prediction markets (Polymarket, HIP-4) and Hyperliquid perp data. Distinguishes from siblings by being a one-call replacement for multiple lookups.
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?
Implies use when broad market context is needed, and mentions it replaces 3+ separate lookups. However, does not explicitly state when not to use or list specific alternative tools for narrower queries.
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.
Many tools are specialized, but several pairs have fuzzy boundaries: e.g., get_funding_rates vs get_top_funding_rates, get_basic_macro vs get_macro_context, get_simple_iv vs get_options_iv. An agent could easily select the wrong one.
Most tools follow a 'get_X' pattern with descriptive noun phrases. There are a few exceptions like 'create_api_key' and 'search_markets', but overall the convention is consistent and readable.
With 47 tools, the server is overloaded. While the domain is broad, this many tools makes discovery and selection difficult for an agent, reducing coherence.
The tool set covers an impressively wide range: macro data, funding, prediction markets, OI history, whale tracking, risk analytics, position sizing, backtesting, and signal generation. It leaves no obvious gaps for a crypto trading assistant.