Gate Info MCP

info_platformmetrics_get_cex_orderbook_depth

Read-onlyIdempotent

Competitor CEX ±1% order-book depth (spot/perp) from warehouse indices; BTC/ETH liquidity benchmarking. Gate native ladder→get_orderbook. Read-only public research data. No account access, no order placement or fund transfers. Not investment advice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max rows; default 20, max 100.
`symbol`	Yes	Base asset e.g. BTC, ETH.
`exchange`	No	Venue e.g. BINANCE; when set with exchange index, filters exchange dimension.
`data_scope`	No	exchange\|market; default market if only market index configured, else exchange when exchange set.
`market_type`	No	spot\|perp (maps to SPOT\|PERP); default perp.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes
`items`	Yes
`limit`	Yes
`total`	Yes
`symbol`	Yes
`exchange`	Yes
`data_scope`	Yes
`duration_ms`	Yes
`market_type`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedAug 27, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- addedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / items / items / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +true
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / items / type
```
Previous value: -"array"New value: +[
+  "null",
+  "array"
+]
```
AddedApr 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description goes beyond annotations by explicitly stating 'Read-only public research data', 'No account access', 'no order placement or fund transfers', and 'Not investment advice'. This aligns with the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations, though the odd 'Gate native ladder→get_orderbook' phrase adds slight ambiguity.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is short and mostly to the point, but the phrase 'Gate native ladder→get_orderbook' appears extraneous and confusing. The inclusion of 'Not investment advice' is useful but could be seen as added noise.

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?

Given the output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the description adds sufficient use-case context and reinforces read-only behavior. The mentions of 'warehouse indices' and 'competitor CEX' help situate the tool, although the cryptic ladder phrase prevents a perfect score.

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?

The schema already provides descriptions for all five parameters, so this dimension starts at baseline. The description adds context like 'spot/perp' and 'BTC/ETH', but does not materially clarify the meanings of exchange, data_scope, or limit beyond what the schema already states.

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 states the tool retrieves CEX order-book depth within ±1% for spot/perp markets and is intended for BTC/ETH liquidity benchmarking. However, the phrase 'Gate native ladder→get_orderbook' is cryptic and slightly obscures the exact purpose.

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?

The description implies usage for competitor CEX liquidity research and explicitly notes it is read-only public data, but it does not compare with sibling tools such as info_marketdetail_get_orderbook or state when this tool should be preferred over alternatives.

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

All Gate Info MCP 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.