Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Wicked MCP server

Wicked MCP server

by WickedAPI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(1)Admin
TypeScript
Hybrid

orderbook

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch top-of-book depth and spread in basis points for a crypto symbol from Binance, Bybit, or Hyperliquid to assess market liquidity and trading conditions.

Instructions

[Trading Data API] Top-of-book depth + spread (bps) from Binance, Bybit, or Hyperliquid.

Example: /v1/orderbook?symbol=BTC&exchange=binance&depth=10

Use when you need top-of-book depth and spread (bps) on Binance, Bybit or Hyperliquid. Not for a prediction-market book (use kalshi_market).

Behavior: read-only. Priced via x402 (USDC on Base) or free with WICKEDAPI_API_KEY; with neither, you get HTTP 402 with the decoded price in payment_required (a price quote, not a failure).

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": {
      "symbol": "<symbol>"
    },
    "name": "orderbook"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
depthNoOptional. Levels per side (default 10, max 50).
symbolYesRequired. Base crypto symbol (e.g. BTC).
exchangeNoOptional. binance (default), bybit, or hyperliquid.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the description's "read-only" line is redundant. What it does add beyond structured data is the payment/auth model: x402 USDC on Base, free with an API key, and — importantly — that an HTTP 402 carrying a decoded price is a quote rather than a failure. That is genuinely useful pre-call context, though it says nothing about response shape or rate limits.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource definition, then an example, then usage/exclusion, then payment behavior — a natural decision order. The only mild redundancy is the opening line and the "Use when..." sentence restating depth and spread, which is acceptable reinforcement at the routing point.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of telling the agent what comes back. It conveys the concept (bid/ask levels per side plus a spread in bps) and the payment path, but never states the response fields, ordering, or how to interpret an empty/synthetic book. Adequate to call correctly, thin for interpreting the result.

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 100% with per-parameter descriptions for symbol, exchange and depth, so the schema already carries the semantics. The worked example URL `/v1/orderbook?symbol=BTC&exchange=binance&depth=10` shows the three parameters composed together, which is a small but real addition over 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?

States a specific resource and measurement (top-of-book depth plus spread in bps) and names all three supported venues (Binance, Bybit, Hyperliquid). It also explicitly carves out the prediction-market case, so an agent can tell it apart from kalshi_market and polymarket without inspecting schemas.

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?

"Use when you need top-of-book depth and spread (bps)" gives the positive trigger, and "Not for a prediction-market book (use kalshi_market)" gives both the exclusion and the named alternative. Nothing about selection is left to inference.

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