Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Ironflow: Hyperliquid data

by io.github.ironflowsh
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Test liquidation alert

test_liquidation_alert

Send a sample Hyperliquid liquidation, marked as a test, to an alert's destination now and report whether it arrived (delivered true or false, with the destination's answer). A delivered test switches a disabled alert back on. One test per alert every 10 seconds.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "test_liquidation_alert"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesAlert id from create_liquidation_alert or list_liquidation_alerts

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNoThe destination's answer when it was not delivered
noticeNoPresent 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
statusNoThe alert's status afterwards
deliveredNoWhether the destination accepted the test message

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world operation, but the description adds the side effect those hints don't convey: a delivered test re-enables a disabled alert. It also discloses the per-alert rate limit (one test per 10 seconds) and that the tool reports delivery status plus the destination's answer, which matters because the call reaches an external endpoint.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and result, then the side effect, then the rate limit. Every sentence carries information the agent needs; nothing is repeated from annotations or the schema.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with a full output schema, the description covers what an agent needs: what is sent, that it is marked as a test, the delivery-result semantics, the re-enable side effect, and the throttle. Return values need not be documented because the output schema exists.

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% and the single parameter already documents its source ("Alert id from create_liquidation_alert or list_liquidation_alerts"). The description adds no further meaning about the id — no format, prefix, or error behavior for an unknown id — 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?

The description names a specific verb+resource ("Send a sample Hyperliquid liquidation ... to an alert's destination now") and adds the distinguishing purpose ("marked as a test"), which separates it from sibling alert tools like create_liquidation_alert and list_liquidation_alerts. An agent can tell exactly what this does 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 Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage context is clear: this tests an existing alert's delivery path, and the note that "a delivered test switches a disabled alert back on" warns of the intended re-enable workflow. The 10-second-per-alert throttle is a concrete operational constraint. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives (e.g., when to use this versus create_liquidation_alert), which keeps it at 4.

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 toolsInspect
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