SiteCheck Company Records

Hyperliquid public trader leaderboard: top accounts ranked

b2b_hyperliquid_leaderboard

Read-only

Hyperliquid public trader leaderboard: top accounts ranked by PnL for a chosen window (day, week, month, allTime), with account value, ROI and traded volume. Public on-chain stats; addresses only, no names. The source file is large, so the first call after a cache miss is slow. Related tools on this server, for a different need: b2b_pgatour_leaderboard when you need PGA Tour current and upcoming events from ESPN's public; b2b_openllm_leaderboard when you need open LLM Leaderboard v2: finds open-source language models. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "b2b_hyperliquid_leaderboard"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Rows to return, 1 to 50 (default 10)
`window`	No	day, week, month or allTime (default allTime)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`source`	No
`window`	No
`results`	No
`dataAsOf`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`totalAccounts`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint, the description discloses a real latency trait ('the source file is large, so the first call after a cache miss is slow') and the commercial terms ($0.002 in USDC per successful call via x402 on Base, Solana or Arc; failures not charged). It also pre-empts an expectation gap by saying records are addresses only, no names. Nothing contradicts the annotations.

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 purpose and data contents are front-loaded, and the latency and pricing notes are compact. The 'Related tools' sentence is the weakest part, spending words pointing at PGA Tour and OpenLLM leaderboards that an agent looking for trader PnL would rarely want.

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?

With an output schema, full schema coverage and annotations present, the description supplies the remaining unknowns an agent needs: cost, latency on cache miss, and the anonymity of records. It is essentially complete for a two-parameter read tool, though it omits anything about ordering ties or result limits beyond the 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both limit and window documented including defaults, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description restates the window values (day, week, month, allTime) but adds no formatting, ranking, or pagination semantics beyond it, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource: 'Hyperliquid public trader leaderboard: top accounts ranked by PnL for a chosen window'. It also names the returned fields (account value, ROI, traded volume) and clarifies that the data is public on-chain stats with addresses only, no names. An agent can tell exactly what this returns without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: you call it when you want a ranked PnL leaderboard for a window. The only explicit routing advice points at b2b_pgatour_leaderboard and b2b_openllm_leaderboard, which are unrelated datasets rather than real substitutes, so the when-not guidance doesn't help an agent choose among plausible alternatives.

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

All SiteCheck Company Records 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?