Skip to main content
Glama

Positions

get_positions
Read-onlyIdempotent

An account's open positions as the chain stores them. Ask: "What positions does 0x… hold?"

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": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "get_positions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYes0x-prefixed 20-byte account address (0x followed by 40 hex characters)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNo
addressNo
networkYestestnet or mainnet
summaryYesone plain sentence
positionsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already disclose read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior. The description adds that results reflect open positions as stored on-chain, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations, but it does not address freshness, pagination, or data limitations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The definition is two short sentences, front-loads the core purpose, and includes a directly useful example. There is no redundant or filler wording.

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 simple one-parameter read operation with rich annotations and an output schema, the description supplies sufficient purpose and usage context. The main minor gap is that it does not clarify freshness or completeness characteristics of the on-chain position data.

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%, with the address parameter fully documented including format and pattern. The description's example reinforces the expected input but adds no syntax or semantic detail 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?

The description clearly identifies the resource as an account's open positions and specifies they are the chain-stored view. This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as get_orders or get_balance, though the phrasing is noun-based rather than a direct verb-object statement.

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?

The example question "What positions does 0x… hold?" gives a clear usage context for when an address should be supplied. It does not, however, state exclusions or explicitly name alternative tools for related queries.

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.