Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
taap-mcp

taap-mcp

Official
by 402Protocol
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

set_trigger

Arm a one-time price trigger to sell a percentage of a token when it rises by a set percentage. The live price at setup becomes the baseline.

Instructions

Arm a standing strategy in plain language: "sell half my FUG if it doubles" = sell_pct 50, price_up_pct 100. The live price right now becomes the baseline; the trigger fires ONCE when the price rises by price_up_pct, selling sell_pct of the token balance into the stable. Firing executes within the trigger's own caps under the user's standing approval from this call. Red-flagged (BLOCKED) tokens cannot be armed.

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": {
      "trader_id": "<trader_id>",
      "chain": "<chain>",
      "token_address": "<token_address>",
      "sell_pct": "<sell_pct>",
      "price_up_pct": "<price_up_pct>",
      "stable_token": "<stable_token>"
    },
    "name": "set_trigger"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainYes
sell_pctYesPercent of balance to sell when it fires, e.g. 50 = sell half
trader_idYes
price_up_pctYesRise from current price that fires it, e.g. 100 = doubles
stable_tokenYesStable to sell into (see STABLES in get_started)
stable_symbolNoUSDC
token_addressYesToken to watch/sell
stable_decimalsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the current live price becomes the baseline, that the trigger fires exactly ONCE, that execution is bounded by the trigger's own caps under the standing approval created here, and that BLOCKED tokens cannot be armed. It leaves failure handling and reversibility (cancel_trigger) implicit.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the worked example and then the mechanics. No filler, though the double-quote-heavy opening is slightly dense.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 8 parameters, the behavioral picture is good but incomplete: the return value (e.g., a trigger id), what happens on validation failure, and how to inspect or cancel the armed trigger are not mentioned.

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 coverage is 50%. The description adds genuine meaning by mapping plain language to sell_pct and price_up_pct values ('50 = sell half', '100 = doubles'), but the other undocumented parameters (trader_id, chain, stable_symbol, stable_decimals) get no explanation.

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 ('Arm') and resource ('standing strategy' / trigger) and distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_triggers, cancel_trigger, and check_triggers by describing one-shot arming behavior. The plain-language example makes the effect immediately concrete.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied through the example and the constraints (one-shot firing, needs standing approval from this call, blocked tokens rejected), but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives guidance — nothing routes the agent to cancel_trigger, list_triggers, or pause_trading.

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