Skip to main content
Glama

Rubin Exchange

by trade.rubin

Close a position

close_position

Close all or part of an open perpetual position with a reduce-only MARKET order. Reads the current position, flips the side automatically (LONG→SELL, SHORT→BUY) and sizes the close. percent defaults to 100 (full close); a partial close is floored to the market step size. The close is bounded at oracle ± slippageBps mirrored by side (closing a SHORT buys up to oracle×(1+slip), closing a LONG sells down to oracle×(1−slip); default 500 bps = 5%). Returns the verified confirmation outcome — if it is unfilled or partially_filled, the book was thinner than the cap: re-run with a larger slippageBps to sweep deeper. Errors NOT_FOUND if there is no open position in the market.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
marketYesMarket ticker, e.g. BTC-USD
confirmNo
percentNoPortion of the position to close (default 100).
slippageBpsNoMax slippage vs oracle, in bps (default 500). Raise to sweep a thin book.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Rich behavioral details: reads current position, flips side, sizes close, slippage bounds, and explains return outcome (unfilled/partially_filled). No contradiction with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false are not contradicted).

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?

Well-structured with core action upfront. All sentences add value, though slightly verbose for a tool definition. Good balance of detail.

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?

Covers algorithm, slippage, and errors. Lacks explanation of confirm parameter and precise return value structure. Without output schema, description compensates reasonably well.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage 75%. Description adds meaning for percent (default 100, floor to step size) and slippageBps (default 500, bounds). confirm parameter not elaborated but schema covers it.

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?

Clearly states the tool closes all or part of an open perpetual position with a reduce-only market order. Distinguishes from siblings like close_all_positions and open_position.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use: when you have an open position. Mentions error if no position. Lacks explicit alternatives but implies appropriate use.

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

All Rubin Exchange toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are clearly distinct, but there is overlap among the read-heavy account tools: get_balance/get_funding_status/fund virtually duplicate each other, and get_equity/get_portfolio/get_position_risk/get_open_orders/get_positions all converge on equity and open-position data. The detailed descriptions help an agent choose, but several tools have fuzzy boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

The overwhelming majority follow the expected verb_noun convention: get_*, place_*, cancel_*, close_*. Minor deviations such as batch_cancel, get_candles_multi, top_up_gas, and whoami make the pattern not perfectly uniform, but the inconsistency is small.

Tool Count2/5

At 33 tools, the surface is beyond what most agents need and includes several redundant query helpers rather than genuinely distinct operations. A broad exchange can justify a large surface, but get_balance/get_funding_status, get_equity/get_portfolio/get_position_risk, and get_candles/get_candles_multi make the set feel top-heavy.

Completeness4/5

The core lifecycle is well covered: market discovery, market data, order placement/cancellation, position management, risk, funding transfers, PnL, and account status. Obvious gaps are limited to historical order lookup by order ID, a way to cancel across all markets in one call, and a few optional account-history conveniences.

Resources