AlphaYou: Smart Money Intel

Compare traders

compare_hyperliquid_traders

Read-only

Use one call to compare two to five distinct public wallets. Returns the analysis time, history length, losses and missing results of each wallet as reported. No suitability or follower-return claims.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "addresses": "<addresses>"
    },
    "name": "compare_hyperliquid_traders"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`addresses`	Yes	Two to five distinct wallet addresses

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 12, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / addresses / description
```
Added value: +"Two to five distinct wallet addresses"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / addresses / items / description
```
Added value: +"Public wallet address, 0x plus 40 characters"
```
First observedOct 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true). The description goes further by naming what comes back (analysis time, history length, losses, missing results) and by bounding claims ("No suitability or follower-return claims"), which tells the agent not to over-read the output as advice. It still doesn't say how partial or missing wallet data is handled beyond the phrase "as reported".

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences, no filler, with the cardinality constraint and the single-call benefit front-loaded. The limitation sentence is short and earns its place by scoping interpretation of the output.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return-value burden, and it names the key returned fields (analysis time, history length, losses, missing results). For a read-only comparison tool this is largely sufficient; the only gap is how many wallets may fail or be missing before the call errors.

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% and the single parameter is fully documented with pattern, min/maxItems, and a description, so the schema carries the load. The description's "two to five distinct public wallets" restates what the schema already constrains rather than adding new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate for a one-parameter tool with complete schema coverage.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ("compare two to five distinct public wallets") plus the cardinality bound, so the agent knows this is a multi-wallet comparison rather than a single-wallet lookup. It stops short of naming the single-wallet sibling (analyze_hyperliquid_wallet) or search_hyperliquid_traders, so differentiation is implied by cardinality only.

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?

"Use one call to compare" implies the batch-use case and implicitly contrasts with per-wallet tools, which is real but indirect guidance. There is no explicit when-not statement, no mention of the sibling alternatives, and no note on what to do for a single wallet or for more than five.

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

All AlphaYou: Smart Money Intel 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.

Resources

Need Help?