AgentFeed

Exit liquidity method

get_exit_method

Read-onlyIdempotent

FREE: how overhang measures exit liquidity on lending collateral, and the counts behind every paid answer - computed from the tape at request time, nothing hardcoded. Returns what is measured (the protocol's own live-refetched mark vs realisable value from sell-direction quotes at real clip sizes), the corroboration rule in plain terms (a terminal verdict needs six consecutive agreeing floor observations from the symbol's own tape; one sample is never enough; a contradicted floor buys a fresh probe rather than writing a hole), the full status vocabulary including why a router refusal and an empty book are different facts, the size-matched control design and its results, the gated sweep and row counts, covered symbols and markets, and the measured cadence. Read this before paying for get_exit_quote, and to check the claim rather than trust it. Free.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	the get_exit_method payload
`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_exit_method payload",
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "const": "get_exit_method",
+      "description": "the tool that produced this payload",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "tool",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already state readOnly/openWorld/idempotent. The description goes well beyond them by disclosing that data is 'computed from the tape at request time, nothing hardcoded,' that it is free, and that the status vocabulary distinguishes events like 'a router refusal and an empty book' as different facts. These are behavioral specifics not derivable from the annotations.

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?

The description is a dense single paragraph covering many distinct aspects (measurement methodology, corroboration rule, status vocabulary, control design, row counts, covered symbols, cadence) with no filler. It is front-loaded with 'FREE' and the core question about overhang, though a bulleted structure would slightly improve scannability.

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 zero-parameter read-only informational tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it explains what is returned, why the tool exists, how the data is computed, and when to use it relative to the paid sibling. Nothing an agent needs to correctly select and invoke the tool 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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is trivially 100%, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly contains no parameter information because none is needed for invocation.

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 clearly defines the tool as returning the methodology and live-computed data behind exit liquidity measurements, with specific phrases like 'Returns what is measured' and 'the corroboration rule in plain terms.' It distinguishes itself from the paid sibling get_exit_quote by being explicitly 'FREE' and framed as the precursor, so an agent can tell it apart without opening schemas.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent when to use it: 'Read this before paying for get_exit_quote, and to check the claim rather than trust it.' This both identifies the alternative tool and the condition that selects this one, leaving nothing to inference.

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.