Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bybit-mcp

bybit-mcp

by JohnnyWic
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

execute_rfq_quote

Fill a quote from an RFQ by submitting RFQ ID, quote ID, and side (maker/taker) to execute the trade.

Instructions

Execute (fill) a quote.

Args: rfq_id: RFQ ID. quote_id: Quote ID. quote_side: Quote side: maker, taker.

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": {
      "rfq_id": "<rfq_id>",
      "quote_id": "<quote_id>",
      "quote_side": "<quote_side>"
    },
    "name": "execute_rfq_quote"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rfq_idYes
quote_idYes
quote_sideYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only lists parameters and does not mention side effects, permissions, or consequences of execution.

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?

Description is extremely concise with only two sentences and a short parameter list. Main action is front-loaded, no wasted words.

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?

Lacks essential context like return value, prerequisites, or connection to RFQ workflow. Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient for a complete understanding.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaning by explaining each parameter, e.g., 'Quote side: maker, taker' provides allowed values beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the tool executes (fills) a quote, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_rfq_quote and cancel_rfq_quote.

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 versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites or context, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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