FortFi Treasury MCP

rank_hyperliquid_markets

Rank Hyperliquid perp markets by 24h volume, pctChange, or funding. Returns dex + assetClass tags. Default scope=core; pass scope=all for HIP-3. Cheap filter only — use screen_hyperliquid_markets for breakout TA.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "rank_hyperliquid_markets"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`dex`	No	Filter dex ids. Comma-separated string or array.
`sort`	No	Default volume
`limit`	No	Default 20
`scope`	No	Default core
`direction`	No	Default desc
`assetClass`	No	Filter asset classes. Comma-separated string or array.
`includeAllDesks`	No	When true, same as scope=all

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the default scope, notes the tool is a cheap/lightweight filter, and names return tags. It stops short of stating read-only semantics explicitly or any result-size/pagination behavior, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Four short sentences, each carrying distinct information: purpose, return shape, scope default, and the alternative-tool routing. Nothing is redundant and the routing constraint is front-loaded at the end where it is most actionable.

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 7-parameter, no-output-schema read tool, the description covers purpose, defaults, return tags, and the sibling split. It could still say more about what the ranking output looks like beyond tags and about how limit/direction interact, but nothing essential to calling it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning the schema lacks: scope=all corresponds to HIP-3 markets. It also surfaces the three primary sort modes by name. It omits that openInterest is also a valid sort and says nothing about direction or limit behavior.

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 a specific verb (rank) and resource (Hyperliquid perp markets) plus the exact ranking dimensions. It is clearly separable from list_hyperliquid_markets and screen_hyperliquid_markets, which are explicitly named or implied as different modes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit routing rule: use this as a 'cheap filter only' and use screen_hyperliquid_markets for breakout TA. It also gives a concrete scope rule (default core, pass scope=all for HIP-3), so the agent knows when each mode applies.

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?