AgentFeed

Liquidation history

get_liq_history

Read-onlyIdempotent

Liquidation history, time-bucketed: total, long and short USD, prints and biggest print per bucket, for any USDT perp or the whole recorded universe, up to 7 days back. Bybit is the only complete liq tape in crypto and no exchange publishes history of it. Costs 0.05 USDC per call (x402, USDC on Solana or Base).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`hours`	No	lookback 1-168, default 24
`scope`	No	all = whole universe
`symbol`	No	USDT perp symbol e.g. SOLUSDT, BTCUSDT (default SOLUSDT)
`bucket_min`	No	bucket minutes 5-1440, default 60

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	the get_liq_history payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_liq_history
`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_liq_history payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_liq_history",
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "const": "get_liq_history",
+      "description": "the tool that produced this payload",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "tool",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, which already cover safety. The description adds valuable context: cost per call (0.05 USDC via x402), the claim about Bybit being the only complete liq tape (implying data source), and the 7-day lookback limit. These go beyond annotations and help set expectations for cost and data availability.

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 single, information-dense sentence that front-loads the core output (time-bucketed liquidation history) before adding scope and time constraints. It then provides valuable context on data uniqueness and cost. Every clause earns its place, though it could be slightly more structured for readability.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multiple parameters, scoping options, output schema) and the rich annotations, the description covers the key operational facts: time window, scope, cost, and data source uniqueness. The output schema handles return structure, and annotations cover safety. Missing minor things like example usage or authentication specifics, but not critical.

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 the schema already explains each parameter (hours, scope, symbol, bucket_min). The description adds no extra parameter-level details beyond what's in the schema, but the schema's descriptions are sufficient. It clarifies the 'all' scope and default symbol, but that's already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('get') and resource ('liquidation history') with detailed output contents: time-bucketed totals, long and short USD, prints, biggest print per bucket, for a symbol or whole universe. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_last_liquidation (single print) and get_recent_liquidations (recent trades), making it unique among the many liquidation-related tools.

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?

The description implies when to use: for historical liquidation data up to 7 days back, as opposed to real-time or single-liquidation tools. It mentions the whole-universe option and the 7-day limit. However, it doesn't explicitly say 'when not to use' or name alternative tools for other liquidation needs, but the context is clear enough for an agent to pick this for historical analysis.

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.