Bull OTC

bull_deposit

Use as a SELLER to submit the signed permit from bull_deposit_plan. Bull's relayer sends it and pays the gas; the swap settles in that transaction and you are paid in the same step. Returns the transaction hash. Signed: the first call returns a message to sign; call again with the same arguments plus timestamp and signature.

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": {
      "quoteId": "<quoteId>",
      "permitDeadline": "<permitDeadline>",
      "v": "<v>",
      "r": "<r>",
      "s": "<s>",
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "bull_deposit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`r`	Yes	Signature r.
`s`	Yes	Signature s.
`v`	Yes	Signature v.
`address`	Yes	Your wallet address (the buyer or seller). Required.
`quoteId`	Yes	Quote id.
`signature`	No	EIP-191 personal_sign of `message` from the previous response. Leave empty on the first call.
`timestamp`	No	From the previous bull_* response. Leave empty on the first call.
`permitDeadline`	Yes	message.deadline from the permit.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 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 full burden and does well: it discloses that Bull's relayer submits and pays gas, that the swap settles atomically in that transaction, that payment occurs in the same step, and that the first call only returns a message to sign. Failure modes (e.g., expired permit, revert behavior) and irreversibility are not addressed.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the actor and action, followed by mechanics and return value. The 'Returns the transaction hash' sentence is short and earns its place; 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 an eight-parameter write tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers custody of gas, atomic settlement, the return value, and the signing handshake. Only error/edge-case behavior is missing, which is a modest gap given how much is already explained.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so each of the eight parameters is already documented, including the leave-empty-on-first-call guidance for signature and timestamp. The description reinforces the two-phase argument pattern but adds little parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('submit the signed permit from bull_deposit_plan') and pins the caller's role as SELLER, which distinguishes it from the seller-side plan tool it depends on. It stops short of contrasting with other siblings, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a clear when-to-use condition ('Use as a SELLER') plus the prerequisite artifact (signed permit from bull_deposit_plan) and the exact two-call sequence. No explicit when-not or alternative paths are stated, keeping it just below the top score.

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

All Bull OTC 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?