Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Agentic AQUA

Agentic AQUA

Official
by AquaWallet
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

sideswap_list_assets

Lists Liquid assets supported for atomic swaps on mainnet or testnet, helping identify eligible assets such as L-BTC, USDt, EURx, MEX, and DePix.

Instructions

List Liquid assets that SideSwap supports for atomic swaps (e.g. L-BTC, USDt, EURx, MEX, DePix).

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": "sideswap_list_assets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
networkNomainnet

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. Description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic listing operation. No mention of side effects, permissions, 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence, no fluff, front-loaded with action and resource. Could be expanded slightly with parameter info without losing conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

No output schema, no parameter descriptions, no guidance on behavior. Description is too minimal given the tool's complexity and lack of annotations.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Only parameter 'network' is present in schema with enum but no description. Description does not mention the parameter or explain its purpose (e.g., mainnet vs testnet). Schema coverage is 0%.

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?

Description clearly states 'List Liquid assets that SideSwap supports for atomic swaps' with specific examples (L-BTC, USDt, EURx, MEX, DePix). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like lw_list_assets (for Liquid Wallet) and sideshift_list_coins.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as lw_list_assets or sideshift_list_coins. No mention of prerequisites or context where this is preferred.

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