subscribeRfqQuotes
Subscribe to RFQ (Request for Quote) quote streams to receive real-time pricing updates on Bybit. Requires authentication.
Instructions
订阅 RFQ 报价(需要鉴权)
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| messageCount | No | ||
| timeoutMs | No |
Subscribe to RFQ (Request for Quote) quote streams to receive real-time pricing updates on Bybit. Requires authentication.
订阅 RFQ 报价(需要鉴权)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| messageCount | No | ||
| timeoutMs | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses authentication but no other behavioral details such as whether it opens a WebSocket, how subscription works, or effects of parameters. Very limited.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, though it could include more information without losing conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given two parameters and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It does not explain the behavior of the subscription or how parameters affect it, leaving significant gaps.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0% and the description does not mention any parameters. Since coverage is low, the description must compensate, but it fails entirely to explain messageCount or timeoutMs.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action (subscribe) and resource (RFQ quotes) and notes authentication. It is specific but does not differentiate from sibling subscription tools like subscribeRfqPublicTrades, which reduces clarity slightly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
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. The description only mentions authentication, but fails to provide context for usage decisions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/bybit-exchange/trading-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server