Orkid Swap

Orkid Swap Deep Link

orkid_swap_link

Read-only

Build a hydrated Orkid crypto swap URL (prefilled token pair, amount, chain, partner attribution). Use when a user needs a swap link to review — they sign in their own wallet, the agent never touches keys. Requires X-ORKID-API-Key header like all tool calls.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "orkid_swap_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	Output token symbol, e.g. WETH
`from`	No	Input token symbol, e.g. USDC
`chain`	No	base \| ethereum \| arbitrum \| unichain \| bsc \| robinhood \| polygon
`amount`	No	Human-readable amount, e.g. "25"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description adds useful context beyond that, stating the agent never touches keys and the user signs in their own wallet. It also states the authentication requirement (X-ORKID-API-Key header). The main gap is that it does not address whether links expire or what the returned URL looks like.

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?

The description is three tight sentences that front-load the core action (build a swap URL) before safety and auth details. Nothing is padded, though "crypto swap" slightly duplicates the title.

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?

The tool is simple (4 flat params, no output schema), and the description conveys the return value (a hydrated URL) and the auth prerequisite. It is less complete about behavior when optional parameters are omitted—defaults and required-versus-optional handling are unstated.

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 the schema already documents all four parameters with examples (WETH, USDC, chain list, "25"). The description restates token pair, amount, and chain, and adds the notion of "partner attribution" that has no corresponding parameter, which is mild extra value. An overall baseline of 3 is fair.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: "Build a hydrated Orkid crypto swap URL (prefilled token pair, amount, chain, partner attribution)." That accurately describes what the tool does and how it differs from quote tools. However, it never names the sibling tools (orkid_quote, orkid_bridge_quote) or says why an agent should use this tool rather than one of them.

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?

"Use when a user needs a swap link to review" gives a clear condition for calling the tool and clarifies that the user, not the agent, signs the transaction. However, it gives no explicit exclusions and names no alternatives among the sibling quote tools.

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

All Orkid Swap 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?