Skip to main content
Glama

Gate DEX MCP

by io.github.gateio-dev

dex_auth_gate_login_poll

Destructive

Poll Gate OAuth; returns pending/ok/error. [write] On ok: replace mcp_token unless linked_to_google_session is true. Pass auto_replace_binding=true to rebind exchange UID on new Gate session.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
flow_idYesFlow ID returned by dex_auth_gate_login_start
auto_replace_bindingNoIf true and status is ok: when new session walletType is not gate_mcp/gate_quick, call BW POST /v1/wallet/inner/rebind (same as dex_wallet_replace_binding). Gate-native sessions are blocked without calling BW.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses the [write] side effect, conditional mcp_token replacement, and rebind behavior, complementing the destructiveHint=true annotation with specific details.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and packed with relevant behavioral details without waste.

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?

Covers return statuses, side effects, and key conditions. With schema and annotations providing parameter and safety details, the description is complete for the tool's moderate complexity.

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 coverage is 100% and describes both parameters fully. The description only restates auto_replace_binding behavior without adding new meaning.

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 it polls Gate OAuth and returns pending/ok/error, clearly distinguishing from start or Google poll siblings. The verb 'Poll' is specific and the resource 'Gate OAuth' is explicit.

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?

Flow_id tied to dex_auth_gate_login_start implies sequential use, and auto_replace_binding guidance is provided. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool vs alternatives.

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

All Gate DEX MCP 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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct roles (auth flows, market data, swap stages, wallet operations). A few ambiguities exist, such as dex_tx_get_sol_unsigned vs dex_tx_transfer_preview and dex_agentic_report's name not matching its description, but overall agents can reliably select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

Naming is inconsistent: while all tools share the dex_ prefix and category segments, some use get_*, others list_*, and several are noun phrases (dex_chain_config, dex_tx_gas, dex_tx_detail). Auth tool ordering also varies (gate_login_start vs login_gate_wallet), making the pattern less predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With 47 tools, the server is over-scoped and burdensome for agents to navigate. Even though the broad DEX domain justifies many features, this exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many' and could benefit from consolidation into fewer, higher-level tools.

Completeness4/5

The tool set comprehensively covers DEX workflows: auth, market data, token info, wallet balances, transfer/swap pipeline, cross-chain bridge, and x402 payments. Minor gaps include lack of explicit swap cancellation or withdrawal execution, but these are secondary to the core functionality.

Resources