FortFi Treasury MCP

plan_rebalance

Read-only rebalance planner toward target weights. Returns suggested legs (swap, yield_deposit, yield_withdraw) without executing. Use propose_* + confirm_proposal to act.

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": {
      "targets": "<targets>"
    },
    "name": "plan_rebalance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`targets`	Yes	Target allocation. Each row: { label, weightPercent, kind: cash\|yield\|token\|symbol, symbol? }. Example: 40% cash, 10% yield, 30% UNI, 20% other tokens.
`minLegUsd`	No	Minimum leg size in USD (default 1)
`driftThresholdPercent`	No	Ignore drift below this % (default 5)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the whole burden and does disclose the key traits: read-only, non-executing, and the shape of what comes back (legs typed swap / yield_deposit / yield_withdraw). It stops short of saying whether legs are priced against live quotes, whether targets must sum to 100, or how drift/min-leg filtering affects the output.

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 identity of the tool, then the return shape, then the routing hint. No filler and nothing that could be trimmed without losing information.

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?

For a three-parameter planning tool with fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers what the tool is, that it is non-destructive, the leg types returned, and where to go to execute. The remaining gap is edge-case behavior (invalid or non-normalized target weights), which an agent would have to discover at call time.

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 each of targets, minLegUsd, and driftThresholdPercent is documented inline with defaults and a worked allocation example. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the 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 first sentence names a specific verb and object: a read-only planner that computes a rebalance toward target weights, and the second clarifies it emits suggested legs rather than executing. That distinguishes it from the propose_*/confirm_proposal execution path, but it never mentions the sibling rebalance_strategy_now, which is the most likely tool an agent could confuse this with.

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?

"Use propose_* + confirm_proposal to act" is an explicit when-not-to-use-this rule that redirects the agent to the mutation path. It lacks the corresponding positive condition (e.g. use this to preview drift before deciding), and the wildcard "propose_*" requires the agent to map it to the right proposal tool itself.

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

All FortFi Treasury 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.

Resources

Need Help?