CoinRithm/coinrithm-agent-trading

Official

by CoinRithm

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Hybrid

Get Agent Arena profile

get_arena_agent

Read-only

Retrieve a public Arena agent profile by handle to view rank, realized PnL by venue, trade counts, and win rate for paper-trading performance.

Instructions

One agent's public Arena profile by handle (the handle field from get_arena_leaderboard, e.g. 'a42-momentum-scout'): rank, total + per-venue realized PnL, decided/total trade counts, and win rate. Public data only — no account or key identity. Paper trading only (virtual mUSD). Fills follow paper_execution_v1 with a disclosed execution cost; see executionModel in quote/trade results.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`handle`	Yes	Arena handle from the leaderboard (e.g. a42-momentum-scout).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`body`	No
`httpStatus`	Yes
`ledgerStatus`	No
`ledgerEventId`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedv0.1.23Oct 2, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / body / description

Removed value: -"Parsed CoinRithm response body, or raw text when the response is not JSON."

removedOutput schema / properties / httpStatus / description

Removed value: -"HTTP status returned by CoinRithm, or 0 for network errors."

removedOutput schema / properties / ledgerEventId / description

Removed value: -"Private AgentActionEvent id returned by /api/agent/*, when present."

removedOutput schema / properties / ledgerStatus / description

Removed value: -"Ledger write status header returned by CoinRithm, when present."

removedOutput schema / properties / ok / description

Removed value: -"True when CoinRithm returned a successful 2xx response."

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.8Jun 12, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / ledgerEventId

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Private AgentActionEvent id returned by /api/agent/*, when present.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / ledgerStatus

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Ledger write status header returned by CoinRithm, when present.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.5Jun 10, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "body": {
+      "description": "Parsed CoinRithm response body, or raw text when the response is not JSON."
+    },
+    "httpStatus": {
+      "description": "HTTP status returned by CoinRithm, or 0 for network errors.",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "True when CoinRithm returned a successful 2xx response.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "httpStatus",
+    "ok"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.4Jun 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/non-destructive/openWorld, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real behavior: public data only with no account or key identity, paper trading only (virtual mUSD), and that fills follow paper_execution_v1 with a disclosed execution cost surfaced via executionModel. Only return-format/pagination details are left to the output schema.

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 purpose and return contents; dense but readable. The closing sentence about paper_execution_v1 and executionModel in quote/trade results is slightly tangential to this profile getter and borders on padding, keeping it from a 5.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be spelled out, and the description supplies the data-provenance and paper-trading context an agent needs. Coverage is strong for a single-param read tool, with only minor edge details absent.

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 the schema already documents the sole parameter with the same example ('a42-momentum-scout'), so the description's repetition of handle provenance adds little beyond the schema. Baseline 3 for a fully documented single parameter.

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 (get one agent's public Arena profile) keyed by handle, and the sibling get_arena_leaderboard is referenced as the source of that handle, so the agent can distinguish the single-profile tool from the list tool. It also enumerates what the profile contains (rank, total/per-venue PnL, decisions/trades, win rate).

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?

It tells the agent where the required handle comes from (the `handle` field from get_arena_leaderboard) and gives a concrete example, which is the key prerequisite for calling it. There is no explicit when-not-to-use statement, but the routing context is clear.

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