Skip to main content
Glama
Habinar

MCP Paradex Server

by Habinar

paradex_account_funding_payments

Analyze funding payment history to calculate costs, assess P&L impact, and plan trading strategies for perpetual futures positions.

Instructions

Track your funding payment history to understand its impact on P&L.

Use this tool when you need to:
- Calculate total funding costs or gains for a position
- Analyze how funding has affected your overall performance
- Plan position timing around funding payment schedules
- Compare funding costs across different markets
- Account for funding in your trading strategy profitability

Funding payments can significantly impact perpetual futures trading P&L,
especially for longer-term positions or in markets with volatile funding rates.

Example use cases:
- Calculating the total funding component of your P&L
- Comparing funding costs against trading profits
- Planning position entries/exits around funding payment times
- Identifying markets where funding has been consistently favorable
- Reconciling funding payments for accounting purposes

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
market_idNoFilter by market ID.
start_unix_msYesStart time in unix milliseconds.
end_unix_msYesEnd time in unix milliseconds.

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'paradex_account_funding_payments' tool. It is registered via the @server.tool decorator and implements the logic to fetch funding payments from the Paradex client using provided parameters (optional market_id and required time range). The function parameters with Annotated types define the input schema. It returns the raw API response.
    @server.tool(name="paradex_account_funding_payments")
    async def get_account_funding_payments(
        market_id: Annotated[str | None, Field(default=None, description="Filter by market ID.")],
        start_unix_ms: Annotated[int, Field(description="Start time in unix milliseconds.")],
        end_unix_ms: Annotated[int, Field(description="End time in unix milliseconds.")],
        ctx: Context = None,
    ) -> dict:
        """
        Track your funding payment history to understand its impact on P&L.
    
        Use this tool when you need to:
        - Calculate total funding costs or gains for a position
        - Analyze how funding has affected your overall performance
        - Plan position timing around funding payment schedules
        - Compare funding costs across different markets
        - Account for funding in your trading strategy profitability
    
        Funding payments can significantly impact perpetual futures trading P&L,
        especially for longer-term positions or in markets with volatile funding rates.
    
        Example use cases:
        - Calculating the total funding component of your P&L
        - Comparing funding costs against trading profits
        - Planning position entries/exits around funding payment times
        - Identifying markets where funding has been consistently favorable
        - Reconciling funding payments for accounting purposes
        """
        client = await get_authenticated_paradex_client()
        params = {"market": market_id, "start_at": start_unix_ms, "end_at": end_unix_ms}
        # Remove None values from params
        params = {k: v for k, v in params.items() if v is not None}
        response = client.fetch_funding_payments(params)
        return response
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively explains that funding payments impact P&L in perpetual futures trading, especially for longer-term positions or volatile markets. However, it doesn't disclose technical behaviors like rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination, or error conditions that would be important for an agent.

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?

The description is well-structured with a clear purpose statement followed by usage guidelines and example use cases. While comprehensive, some sentences could be more concise. The information is front-loaded with the core purpose first, and each section adds value without unnecessary repetition.

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?

For a read-only historical data tool with good schema coverage but no output schema, the description provides strong context about what the tool returns (funding payment history) and its business purpose. It adequately explains why this data matters for trading analysis, though it could benefit from mentioning the format or structure of returned data.

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%, providing good documentation for all 3 parameters. The description doesn't add specific parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, but it implies the temporal filtering (start/end times) through its focus on payment history analysis. The baseline 3 is appropriate given the comprehensive schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose as tracking funding payment history to understand P&L impact, using specific verbs like 'track' and 'calculate'. It distinguishes from siblings like paradex_account_transactions by focusing specifically on funding payments rather than general transactions, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool with a bulleted list of 5 specific scenarios, including 'calculate total funding costs', 'analyze performance impact', 'plan position timing', 'compare across markets', and 'account for funding in strategy'. It clearly differentiates this from other account tools by focusing on funding payment analysis.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Habinar/mcp-paradex-py'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server