Use this when the user asks about THEIR MCPify account: balance, withdrawable, open positions with PnL and liquidation prices, and whether agent trading is armed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide the safety profile: readOnlyHint true and destructiveHint false. The description adds useful context about what account data is returned, but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits such as data freshness, auth requirements, or response formatting. It also doesn't contradict the annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One front-loaded sentence: the trigger condition comes first, followed by a compact list of data categories. There is no filler or repetition of the schema.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a zero-parameter, read-only account summary, the description is complete: it covers balance, withdrawable, open positions with PnL and liquidation prices, and agent trading arming state. An agent has enough to select and invoke the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has zero properties, so the description carries essentially no parameter burden. It adds selection semantics by describing the user request that maps to this tool, which is appropriate for a parameterless tool. Baseline 4 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly maps a user intent to a resource: 'Use this when the user asks about THEIR MCPify account' followed by a specific data scope. It distinguishes itself from order-, trade-history-, and position-management siblings.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It gives explicit trigger conditions ('when the user asks about their account') and the exact data topics included. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling names such as get_my_open_orders and get_my_trade_history make the boundary easily inferable.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action, but get_markets and get_price overlap in the data they return (price, 24h change, volume, funding), differing mainly by all-markets vs single-coin scope. The descriptions are explicit enough that an agent should rarely misselect, though the boundary is slightly blurry.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: get_ for reads, plus clear action verbs like place_, preview_, cancel_, close_, and set_. There is no mixing of styles or vague generic verbs.
13 tools is well within the ideal range for a trading-focused server. Each tool covers a distinct part of the workflow without feeling bloated or redundant.
The tool surface covers the full trading lifecycle: market data, account/position/order/trade reads, order preview and placement, cancellation, position closing, and TP/SL management. No obvious dead-ends or missing core operations for the stated Hyperliquid perp trading purpose.