Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bybit-mcp

bybit-mcp

by JohnnyWic
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_leveraged_token_order_record

Retrieve purchase and redemption records for leveraged tokens. Filter by token, order ID, or set record limit.

Instructions

Get leveraged token purchase/redemption records.

Args: lt_coin: Filter by leveraged token (optional). order_id: Filter by order ID (optional). limit: Number of records (default: 50).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_leveraged_token_order_record"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lt_coinNo
order_idNo
limitNo

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 carries the full burden. It only says 'Get... records' and lists filters, but does not disclose behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, or return format. For a read tool, more detail on output behavior is expected.

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?

The description is two sentences plus a bullet list, with the purpose front-loaded. No extraneous information. Every part serves a clear function.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description does not explain the return value structure. It only says 'records' without details. Given the tool's simplicity (no required params, no annotations), the description should cover output format.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning to each parameter: 'Filter by leveraged token (optional)', 'Filter by order ID (optional)', 'Number of records (default: 50)'. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions, though could specify valid values for lt_coin.

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 'Get leveraged token purchase/redemption records.' This specifies the action (Get) and resource (leveraged token purchase/redemption records), distinguishing it from siblings like purchase_leveraged_token (action) and get_leveraged_token_info (info).

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 conditions, prerequisites, or scenarios where other tools would be preferred. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it.

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