Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
0xarchive-mcp

0xarchive-mcp

by 0xArchiveIO
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

get_lighter_funding_current

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the current funding rate for any coin on Lighter.xyz. Returns the latest rate and timestamp.

Instructions

Get the current Lighter.xyz funding rate for a coin. Returns the latest funding rate and timestamp.

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": {
      "coin": "<coin>"
    },
    "name": "get_lighter_funding_current"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
coinYesLighter.xyz coin symbol, e.g. 'BTC', 'ETH'

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesResult data object

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.9.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns 'the latest funding rate and timestamp,' which aligns with read-only behavior but does not disclose caching, update frequency, or rate limits.

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?

The description is two sentences front-loaded with the main action. Every word contributes meaning; no superfluous content.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns and the data source. No missing critical information.

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?

The sole parameter 'coin' is fully described in the schema with examples. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline of 3 applies.

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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the current Lighter.xyz funding rate for a coin, specifying the exchange and return fields. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_funding_current (generic) and get_hip3_funding_current (HIP3-specific).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description does not provide when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_funding_history or get_lighter_funding (historical). No exclusions or context about other exchanges or data types is given.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools