riskstate-mcp

get_risk_policy

Retrieve the current risk governance policy for a crypto asset to determine allowed position size, leverage, and trade actions before executing a trade.

Instructions

Get the current risk governance policy for a crypto asset. Returns policy level (BLOCK/CAUTIOUS/GREEN), max position size, leverage limits, allowed and blocked actions, and confidence score. Call this BEFORE every trade to determine how much risk is allowed.

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": {
      "asset": "<asset>"
    },
    "name": "get_risk_policy"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`asset`	Yes	Asset to get risk policy for
`protocol`	No	DeFi lending protocol (default: spark)
`wallet_address`	No	DeFi wallet address for on-chain position data (LTV, health factor)
`include_details`	No	Include detailed breakdown: composite subscores, macro data, risk flags, data sources

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJun 7, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / wallet_address / pattern
```
Added value: +"^0x[a-fA-F0-9]{40}$"
```
First observedv1.0.0Mar 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, but description implies a read-only operation ('Get'). Discloses what is returned. Does not hide any destructive behavior. Lacks detail on authentication or rate limits, but adequate for a policy retrieval tool.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and output details, followed by usage guideline. No unnecessary words. Excellent conciseness.

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?

Despite no output schema or sibling tools, description provides clear purpose, return fields, and usage context. Could mention output format (JSON) but not essential. Sufficient for agent to select and invoke.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 4 parameters. Description does not add significant new semantics beyond the schema; it focuses on return values. Baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Clearly states 'Get the current risk governance policy for a crypto asset' with specific verb and resource. Lists returned fields including policy level, position size, leverage limits, etc. Purpose is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly says 'Call this BEFORE every trade to determine how much risk is allowed.' Provides clear usage context. No alternative tools or when-not-to-use mentioned, but for a standalone tool, this is sufficient.

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

Deploy Server