Regime

Leaderboard rank check

leaderboard_rank_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

How much company a return has. Send a return (+340%) and a window (day, week, month or all time) and get how many accounts on Hyperliquid's whole public leaderboard did the same or better, out of how many traded, its percentile, and the median account next to it. Every row of the exchange's own table, refreshed daily; the denominator is the accounts that traded, not the ones that sat idle.

Use when a trader or an ad quotes a return ("+340% this month") and you want to know how rare it is. Hyperliquid accounts only. Whether last month's top accounts stay on top is copy_trading_check; whether luck explains a win rate, overfitting_odds.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`window`	Yes	day, week, month (default) or allTime.	month
`return_pct`	Yes	In percent: 340 means +340%.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	No	false when we do not hold that data. Never a zero standing in for an answer.
`error`	No	no_data when ok is false.
`model`	No	The method, stated.
`one_in`	No	One account in how many.
`reason`	No	Why, in one sentence, and what we do have instead.
`source`	No	The public file these numbers come from.
`percentile`	No	Share of accounts below it.
`same_or_better`	No	Accounts at that return or above.
`median_return_pct`	No	The middle account, same window.
`share_in_profit_pct`	No	Accounts in profit, same window.
`accounts_that_traded`	No	The denominator.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 2, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / window / default
```
Added value: +"month"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / window / enum
```
Added value: +[
+  "day",
+  "week",
+  "month",
+  "allTime"
+]
```
First observedOct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real context: the data is the exchange's full table refreshed daily, and the denominator is accounts that traded rather than idle ones. It does not discuss rate limits or latency, but for a read-only lookup that is a minor omission.

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 purpose and scoped tightly to two sentences, and the sibling routing is compact. The opening phrase "How much company a return has" is slightly mannered, but it does not obscure the meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not needed, and the description covers the remaining essentials: trigger conditions, scope restriction to Hyperliquid accounts, data freshness, and denominator definition. An agent has everything required to call it correctly.

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% and both parameters are documented in the schema, including the enum and the percent convention, so the baseline is 3. The description restates 'return (+340%)' and the window options but adds no format or edge-case detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (check how a return ranks against Hyperliquid's public leaderboard) with the exact output it produces: count doing the same or better, denominator, percentile, and median account. It also names the siblings it is not (copy_trading_check, overfitting_odds), so an agent can route without opening schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit when-to-use trigger ("when a trader or an ad quotes a return and you want to know how rare it is") plus scope limits ("Hyperliquid accounts only") and two named alternatives with their distinct questions. Nothing is left to inference.

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

All Regime 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?