Skip to main content
Glama

Undertow market liquidity and exit-cost tools

by io.github.beepboop2025

Depth concentration today

venue_concentration
Read-onlyIdempotent

How concentrated the BTC depth backbone is today: which venue holds the largest share of ±1% aggregate depth, the HHI, the effective venue count (1/HHI), and per-venue depth in USD. Low effective venue count means an exit depends on one venue staying open. The subscriber exit_desk_full adds ETH and the venue-failure withdrawal scenario (what your exit costs if the top venue goes dark).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already convey read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds interpretive context ('Low effective venue count means...'), explicitly identifies the BTC-only scope, and mentions the subscriber add-on for ETH and venue-failure scenarios, disclosing limitations and upgrade paths beyond 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a lean three sentences: what is measured, why it matters, and what is excluded. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description enumerates all returned metrics and their interpretation, and notes the related extended tool. For a no-input analytics tool, this provides complete context for an AI agent to invoke it appropriately.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, making the schema trivially complete. The description adds that it reflects 'today' (current state) and requires no input, satisfying the baseline for zero-parameter tools without needing additional parameter explanations.

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?

The description clearly identifies the tool as measuring BTC depth concentration, naming specific outputs (largest share, HHI, effective venue count, per-venue depth in USD). This is a distinct resource and metric set, differentiating it from sibling tools like exit_cost or liquidity_tiers.

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 description gives clear context for when this tool is relevant: assessing 'exit depends on one venue staying open'. It implies the tool is BTC-focused and that an add-on (exit_desk_full) is needed for ETH, which helps scoping, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools.

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

All Undertow market liquidity and exit-cost tools toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct aspect of market liquidity: access status, historical depth episodes, current exit costs, liquidity overview, trust record, fund unwind, venue concentration, and price reconciliation. No two tools overlap in purpose.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names use a consistent lowercase_snake_case noun phrase pattern (e.g., depth_episodes, exit_cost, venue_concentration). This is predictable and coherent, even though the convention is not verb_noun.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range for a specialized analytics server. Each tool provides a unique function without redundancy or bloat.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the domain thoroughly: current liquidity state (exit_cost, venue_concentration, venue_price_reconciliation, liquidity_tiers), historical events (depth_episodes), risk assessment (unwind_watch), and platform meta (agent_access_status, sealed_record). No obvious gaps for the described purpose.

Resources