Skip to main content
Glama
Coinversaa

Coinversaa Pulse

Official
by Coinversaa
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

HIP-4 Trader Outcomes

hip4_trader_outcomes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a single wallet's HIP-4 outcome history (fills, net shares, realized PnL, gross USDH) sorted by notional to track performance.

Instructions

Get one wallet's HIP-4 outcome history: outcome ID, side index, side token, fills, net shares, gross bought/sold USDH, realized PnL, and first/last traded. Requires a Starter-or-higher key. Rows are sorted by gross notional (grossBoughtUsdh + grossSoldUsdh) descending and capped at limit (default 50, max 200; the API route has no paging, so the cap is applied by the connector) — the response carries count (returned), totalCount, truncated and a note; raise limit or shorten days to see more. The API clamps days to 90 and to HIP-4 mainnet launch (2026-05-02) — see data_coverage.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoLook-back window in days. Default 30; the API clamps values above 90.
limitNoMax outcome rows to return, largest gross notional first (default 50, max 200).
addressYesEthereum wallet address (0x...)
useToonFormatNoReturn data in compact toon format (default: true). Set to false for standard JSON.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.12.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / days / description
      Previous value: -"Look-back window in days. Default 30, max 365."New value: +"Look-back window in days. Default 30; the API clamps values above 90."
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 50,
+  "description": "Max outcome rows to return, largest gross notional first (default 50, max 200).",
+  "maximum": 200,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Addedv0.7.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the read-only/idempotent annotations: discloses the tier requirement, the sort key (gross notional descending), the connector-applied cap because the API route has no paging, the truncation metadata returned (count, totalCount, truncated, note), and the API's days clamping to 90 and to mainnet launch. This is the kind of behavioral context annotations cannot carry.

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-loads purpose, then requirement, then ordering/truncation, then clamping — a sensible order. It is dense and delivered as one long paragraph with an em-dash run, but nearly every clause carries decision-relevant detail.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-shape burden and does so by listing the row fields and the truncation envelope. Combined with auth tier, sorting, capping, and clamping rules, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine semantics: the connector-side cap rationale for `limit` and how raising it or shortening `days` changes results. The days clamp is partly a restatement of the schema, keeping it out of the top band.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one wallet's HIP-4 outcome history') and enumerates the returned fields (outcome ID, side index, side token, fills, net shares, gross bought/sold USDH, realized PnL, first/last traded). The wallet-scoped framing implicitly separates it from non-wallet HIP-4 siblings, but it never names an alternative to route against, so it stops short of the top band.

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?

Provides a real prerequisite ('Requires a Starter-or-higher key') and tells the agent how to widen results ('raise limit or shorten days to see more'), plus a pointer to data_coverage. However, it never states when to reach for this tool versus siblings like hip4_top_traders or hip4_outcome_summary, so usage is only implied.

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