AgentFeed

Liquidation cascade forecast

get_cascade_forecast

Read-onlyIdempotent

Liquidation forecast, FORWARD-LOOKING and not a description of what already happened. Returns the probability that a symbol will liquidate more in the NEXT 15 minutes than its own 90th-percentile 15-minute window. Calibrated on a 28-day tape of our own multi-venue liquidation record, which cannot be reconstructed by anyone starting today because no exchange publishes liquidation history. Every answer carries the exact question, the threshold in USD, the window it read, the number of historical occurrences behind the number, and instructions for settling it yourself from the public feed. When a state has too little history the tool DECLINES rather than guessing, and says why. The settled record is free at /api/forecast-record. Costs 0.02 USDC per call (x402, USDC on Solana, Base, Polygon, Arbitrum or Arc).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`symbol`	No	SOL, BTC, ETH or any USDT perp e.g. SXTUSDT (default SOL)
`symbols`	No	comma separated for a batch, max 20, e.g. SOL,BTC,ETH

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	the get_cascade_forecast payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_cascade_forecast
`tool`	Yes	the tool that produced this payload

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 25, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "the get_cascade_forecast payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_cascade_forecast",
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "const": "get_cascade_forecast",
+      "description": "the tool that produced this payload",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "tool",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare the read-only/idempotent safety profile, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: per-call cost (0.02 USDC across five chains), the decline-rather-than-guess behavior, what every answer carries, and the calibration data provenance.

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?

Front-loads the key distinction (forward-looking vs historical) before details. Dense but mostly earning its place; the multi-chain cost enumeration and record-provenance sentences are slightly heavy for a tool description.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained. The description covers purpose, behavior, cost, and failure mode, leaving nothing an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so symbol/symbols are fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 holds.

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+resource (probability a symbol liquidates more in the next 15 minutes than its 90th-percentile window) and explicitly separates itself from historical siblings with 'FORWARD-LOOKING and not a description of what already happened'. An agent can distinguish it from get_cascade_history without opening a 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?

Gives clear context for when the tool applies (forward-looking probability, declines when a state has too little history) and discloses cost. However, it never routes the agent to the obvious alternative, the sibling get_cascade_forecast_free, nor explains when the free version suffices versus this paid one.

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

All AgentFeed 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.