Skip to main content
Glama

AgentFeed

by io.github.seekdaseek
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Funding history

get_funding_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

Funding rate history for any Hyperliquid perp, up to 200 hourly settlements: the average rate, its annualized %, the share of intervals that were positive, and the raw series. What the carry has actually been. Costs 0.005 USDC per call (x402, USDC on Solana, Base, Polygon, Arbitrum or Arc).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNohourly settlements, 1-200, default 30
symbolNoUSDT perp symbol e.g. SOLUSDT, BTCUSDT (default SOLUSDT)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesthe get_funding_history payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_funding_history
toolYesthe tool that produced this payload

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"intervals, 1-200, default 30"New value: +"hourly settlements, 1-200, default 30"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / symbol / description
      Previous value: -"USDT perp symbol e.g. SOLUSDT"New value: +"USDT perp symbol e.g. SOLUSDT, BTCUSDT (default SOLUSDT)"
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "symbol"
-]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "the get_funding_history payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_funding_history",
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "const": "get_funding_history",
+      "description": "the tool that produced this payload",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "tool",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely non-structured behavioral context: the per-call cost of 0.005 USDC, the x402 payment requirement, and the accepted chains (Solana, Base, Polygon, Arbitrum, Arc). It does not, however, describe latency or failure modes beyond the 200-settlement cap.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the concrete capability before the interpretive line and the payment clause. Mostly earns its place, though 'What the carry has actually been.' is flavor rather than specification and could be trimmed.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values needn't be spelled out, yet the description still previews them usefully. The payment/auth detail is an important completeness addition for an x402-priced tool. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing, though alternatives routing is absent.

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%, so both params (limit, symbol) are already fully documented in the schema. The description only echoes 'up to 200 hourly settlements' and 'any Hyperliquid perp' without adding format or default guidance beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema carries the load.

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 (funding rate history), scopes it (any Hyperliquid perp, up to 200 hourly settlements), and enumerates what it returns (average rate, annualized %, positive-interval share, raw series). The word 'history' plus the aggregate-stat framing cleanly separates it from the sibling funding tools (get_funding_rate, get_funding_pulse, get_funding_extremes), even without naming them.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: 'What the carry has actually been' hints at assessing realized funding carry, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no named alternative among the many sibling funding tools. The agent must infer that this is the historical/aggregate counterpart to the live-rate tools.

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

All AgentFeed 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