Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bybit-mcp

bybit-mcp

by JohnnyWic
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

new_crypto_loan_fixed_repay_collateral

Repay a fixed crypto loan by using collateral. Specify loan currency, collateral coin, and amount to settle the loan.

Instructions

Repay fixed crypto loan with collateral.

Args: loan_currency: Loan currency. collateral_coin: Collateral coin. amount: Repay amount. loan_id: Loan ID (optional).

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": {
      "loan_currency": "<loan_currency>",
      "collateral_coin": "<collateral_coin>",
      "amount": "<amount>"
    },
    "name": "new_crypto_loan_fixed_repay_collateral"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
loan_currencyYes
collateral_coinYes
amountYes
loan_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action without explaining side effects, required permissions, or post-repayment state. For a repayment tool, critical details are missing.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short but includes an Args block that repeats schema information verbatim. It could be more concise by removing this and adding meaningful details.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, prerequisites, or the effect of the optional loan_id parameter.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It lists names but adds no meaning beyond the schema. For example, 'amount' could be the repayment amount but its format or relation to loan currency is unspecified.

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 states 'Repay fixed crypto loan with collateral' which clearly identifies the action and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'new_crypto_loan_fixed_repay' or 'new_crypto_loan_flexible_repay_collateral'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of conditions, prerequisites, or when not to use 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