Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Bybit MCP Server

Bybit MCP Server

Official
by bybit-exchange
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

getReferralCampaignRewards

Read-only

Retrieve referral rules and active base, fiat, and earn campaign task/reward configurations for an authenticated user's site to inspect static campaign setup and task details.

Instructions

Query referral rules and active base, fiat, and earn campaign task/reward configurations for the authenticated user's site. This is static configuration, not personal task progress, reward claims, or payout records. Each result.tasks item is a JSON string containing one schemaVersion 2 campaign; parse it before reading its tasks. Campaign and task fields use camelCase: campaignId, awardType, ruleTitle, ruleDescription, ruleParam, taskAwards, and m1Awards. Reward fields include productLine, startTime, and endTime; rebateRule uses depositAmount, tradeAmount, rebateRatioRules, and rebateDurationDays. A failed reward lookup can omit an individual task while keeping the campaign.

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": "getReferralCampaignRewards"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.1.25

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: each result.tasks entry is a JSON string holding a schemaVersion 2 campaign that must be parsed, and a failed reward lookup can silently omit an individual task while keeping the campaign. That partial-failure disclosure is the kind of trait annotations cannot express, though pagination, size limits, and site-resolution behavior remain unstated.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The purpose and the not-this clarification are front-loaded in the first two sentences, with field-level detail deferred to the back. The camelCase and rebate field enumerations are long but earn their place because no output schema exists; only the field list edges toward reference-manual density.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description correctly shoulders the burden of explaining the return shape — nested JSON-string tasks, schemaVersion 2, camelCase naming, reward field groups, and degradation behavior. What remains thin is the meaning of the campaign categories (base, fiat, earn) and how the user's site is determined, which an agent may still need to infer.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is no parameter meaning the description could add. The extensive field documentation it does provide is about return values, not inputs.

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 verb and resource ('Query referral rules and active base, fiat, and earn campaign task/reward configurations') scoped to the authenticated user's site, then explicitly distinguishes the content from personal task progress, reward claims, and payout records. That negative framing separates it from siblings like getReferralCommissionRecords, getReferralUserInvitations, and queryReferrals without needing their schemas.

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?

The line 'This is static configuration, not personal task progress, reward claims, or payout records' gives a clear when-not condition that routes the agent toward or away from this tool. It stops short of naming the specific sibling tools an agent should call instead for progress or payout data, so the alternative is described by category rather than by name.

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