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, Base, Polygon, Arbitrum or Arc).

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

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-annotation behavior: a paid x402 call costing 0.05 USDC per call across specific chains, the underlying data source (Bybit), and a hard 7-day retention limit. It does not mention rate limits or failure modes, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Purpose, granularity, and scope are front-loaded in the first sentence, with cost and payment details last. The middle sentence ('Bybit is the only complete liq tape in crypto and no exchange publishes history of it') is promotional and contributes little to tool selection, a minor deduction from an otherwise tight three-sentence entry.

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, and annotations carry the safety profile; both are handled by structured fields. The description covers the remaining gaps an agent needs: data source, lookback ceiling, scope options, and the payment requirement. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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%: hours, scope, symbol, and bucket_min all carry ranges, defaults, and examples. The description only restates scope semantics ('any USDT perp or the whole recorded universe') and the 7-day cap, which duplicate the schema rather than extend it. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource plus granularity and output contents: 'Liquidation history, time-bucketed: total, long and short USD, prints and biggest print per bucket.' The scope ('any USDT perp or the whole recorded universe') and depth ('up to 7 days back') are explicit. It never names or contrasts a sibling (e.g., get_liq_feed, get_liq_pulse, get_liquidation_stats), so the differentiation is implicit at best.

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?

The 'up to 7 days back' horizon and the 'history, time-bucketed' framing imply this is the retrospective tool rather than a live feed, which is weak implied guidance. No when-to-use, when-not, prerequisites, or named alternatives are given, so an agent must infer its place among the many liq siblings.

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.