Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hyperliquid-info-mcp

hyperliquid-info-mcp

by Glebenjoy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_user_state

Retrieve the perpetual account state for any Hyperliquid wallet, including account value, margin, withdrawable balance, and open positions with PnL and liquidation details.

Instructions

Perp account state for any Hyperliquid wallet address (0x...): account value, total notional, margin used, withdrawable balance, and every open position with side, size, entry, unrealized PnL, liquidation price, and leverage.

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": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "get_user_state"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesWallet address, 0x...

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly identifies a read-only account-state query and details the returned fields (account value, margin, positions), but omits any mention of authentication, rate limits, or error behavior.

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?

Single front-loaded sentence that names the tool's purpose and enumerates key returned data without fluff. No wasted words.

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 one-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description sufficiently covers input (wallet address), output structure (account balances and full position details), and scope (any Hyperliquid perp account). No significant gaps.

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?

With 100% schema coverage (address described as 'Wallet address, 0x...'), the description adds little beyond confirming 'any Hyperliquid wallet address' and the 0x format; schema already covers semantics.

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 uses specific verb 'get' and names resource 'Perp account state' for 'any Hyperliquid wallet address', and enumerates fields. This distinguishes it from sibling market-data tools such as get_all_mids and get_order_book.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided, though the account-state focus clearly differentiates it from market-data siblings. Usage context is implied but not stated.

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