Ironflow: Hyperliquid data

Watch a paper box

get_box_activity

Read-only

What a Hyperliquid paper box and its strategies really did: strategy started, decisions with their reasons, orders, fills, funding, stops, plus equity, PnL, fees and positions. Call it with no after for the latest events, then pass next_cursor as after. gap true means some events were missed. Needs only the box URL.

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": {
      "box": "<box>"
    },
    "name": "get_box_activity"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`box`	Yes	The paper box: its base_url from create_ironbox, or the ibxs_ secret
`after`	No	next_cursor from the previous answer
`limit`	No	Events to return, 1 to 200, default 100

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`gap`	No	True when events between your cursor and the first returned are gone
`paper`	No	true
`events`	No	Oldest first
`notice`	No	Present when the API added a note: how a market name was read, that data starts later than asked because of the history window, or a next step such as a free key
`account`	No	The account now
`has_more`	No	Whether more events are ready
`expires_at`	No	When a trial box ends at the latest, Unix milliseconds
`next_cursor`	No	Pass as after next time
`running_strategies`	No	Strategies running now

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. Beyond that, the description discloses non-obvious behavior: an initial call returns the latest events, subsequent calls page via next_cursor, and a 'gap true' result means events were missed — a data-integrity signal an agent could not infer from the schema. It does not state rate limits or ordering guarantees, keeping it at 4.

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?

Content is front-loaded: what the tool returns, then how to page, then the gap caveat. The opening enumeration is dense but each item earns its place by telling the agent what kinds of records exist. Slightly list-heavy phrasing but no filler sentences.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, yet the description still gives the agent enough to interpret the stream, the cursor loop, and the gap indicator. Combined with 100% parameter coverage and readOnly annotations, nothing needed to invoke this correctly is missing.

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%, so all three parameters are already documented, including the cursor chaining rule and the 1–200 limit range. The description mostly restates the cursor workflow ('pass next_cursor as after') and clarifies that only the box URL is needed, adding little syntax or format meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('What a Hyperliquid paper box and its strategies really did') and enumerates the event types returned (strategy started, decisions with reasons, orders, fills, funding, stops, equity, PnL, fees, positions). That is far more specific than the title 'Watch a paper box'. It never names the sibling it must be distinguished from (get_ironbox, list_box_strategies), so it stops short of a 5.

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 gives operational guidance for pagination: call with no 'after' for the latest events, then pass next_cursor as after. It also notes 'Needs only the box URL'. However, it never says when to choose this over get_ironbox or list_box_strategies, and no exclusion or prerequisite is stated, so usage is implied rather than explicit.

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

All Ironflow: Hyperliquid data 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.