Skip to main content
Glama

AgentFeed

by io.github.seekdaseek
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

TradFi perps radar

get_tradfi_radar
Read-onlyIdempotent

Stock perps, S&P 500, Nasdaq, gold and oil perps ranked by funding rate: every stock, index, commodity and FX perp on the Hyperliquid HIP-3 dexes (trade[XYZ], Paragon, Markets by Kinetiq, Entropy), with funding at its 8h equivalent, a 30-day funding z-score, open interest and its 24h change, mark minus oracle basis and 24h volume. Filter by asset class. Precomputed every 5 minutes; stale data answers 503. Costs 0.02 USDC per call (x402, USDC on Solana, Base, Polygon, Arbitrum or Arc).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topNomarkets returned, 1-200, default 25
classNocomma list of stock, index, commodity, fx, rates, pre_ipo, crypto_index, other (default all)
min_oi_usdNominimum open interest in USD (default 0)

Output Schema

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / min_oi_usd / description
      Previous value: -"minimum open interest in USD; venues that publish no OI are then left out (default 0)"New value: +"minimum open interest in USD (default 0)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / venue
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "comma list of hyperliquid, bybit, binance, okx (default all)",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, open-world), and the description adds genuinely non-derivable behavior: precomputation every 5 minutes, a 503 on stale data, and a hard cost of 0.02 USDC per call via x402 across five named chains. Pricing, freshness and failure mode are exactly the operational facts an agent cannot get from schema or 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?

Front-loaded with the highest-value clause (what is ranked and by what metric), then coverage, then constraints. The parenthetical venue list is dense but informative; the piece is one long sentence that could be split for scannability, but almost every clause earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value explanation is unnecessary, and the description still supplies fresh-ness, failure mode, cost and coverage. The one gap is routing relative to sibling funding/perp tools, which an agent needs given how crowded this namespace is.

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 all three parameters are already documented with types and defaults. The description adds only 'Filter by asset class', which maps to the class parameter but adds no syntax, default or interaction detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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+resource+ranking metric: 'Stock perps, S&P 500, Nasdaq, gold and oil perps ranked by funding rate', and it enumerates the venues covered (trade[XYZ], Paragon, Kinetiq, Entropy) plus the exact fields returned. However, it never distinguishes itself from close siblings like get_tradfi_perps or get_funding_radar, leaving the agent to guess which ranking source to pick.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The only usage cue is 'Filter by asset class', which is really a parameter restatement. There is no statement of when to prefer this over get_tradfi_perps, get_funding_radar or get_funding_extremes, and no when-not guidance, even though several siblings cover adjacent funding/perp territory.

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