Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
omniroute-bridge-mcp

omniroute-bridge-mcp

Official
by c-viper-work
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

hyperliquid_one_click_onboard

Read-onlyIdempotent

Plan HyperEVM HYPE or Arbitrum USDC funding. L1 deposits remain a separate action. Always show executeUrl to the user for 1-click browser wallet signing.

Instructions

Plan HyperEVM HYPE or Arbitrum USDC funding. L1 deposits remain a separate action. Always show executeUrl to the user for 1-click browser wallet signing.

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": {
      "fromChain": "<fromChain>",
      "amount": "<amount>"
    },
    "name": "hyperliquid_one_click_onboard"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
amountYesPositive human-readable source-token amount as a decimal string; no exponent notation. Use strings to preserve precision.
fromChainYesSupported chain slug, alias or numeric chain ID as a string (for example base, arb, solana, 8453).
fromTokenNoSource token symbol such as ETH, USDC or native; amounts are denominated in this token.
targetModeNoFunding destination. both quotes two routes, each spending the entire specified source amount.hyperevm_hype
userAddressNoReal sender address on the source chain. Omit only for a read-only preview that cannot be executed.
recipientAddressNoDestination wallet address, matching the destination chain VM. Verify the platform wallet before onboarding.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and 'Plan' is consistent with that non-executing profile. The description adds real value beyond annotations: it tells the agent to surface the executeUrl for browser wallet signing, which is a behavioral obligation not captured in any structured field.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no padding; the scope and the executeUrl directive both land early. Slightly terse given the tool's complexity, but nothing is wasted.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description's callout of executeUrl meaningfully informs what the agent will receive and must do with it. It stops short of describing the broader response (e.g., quoted routes), but covers what matters for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented. The description adds no per-parameter detail (e.g., how fromChain aliases or targetMode 'both' interact), so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Plan') and resource ('HyperEVM HYPE or Arbitrum USDC funding'), and explicitly carves out that 'L1 deposits remain a separate action'. An agent can tell this is an onboarding/funding-planning tool, though it does not name which sibling to use instead.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Implies usage for onboarding and notes that L1 deposits are out of scope, but gives no explicit routing against siblings like get_cross_chain_bridge_quote or list_supported_chains_and_tokens. The 'when' is inferred rather than stated.

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