BlindOracle

submit_arbitrage_job

Submit market arbitrage jobs to detect arbitrage opportunities across specified trading pairs and exchanges with payment verification.

Instructions

Submit Market Arbitrage job @requirement: REQ-MCP-003 - Arbitrage opportunity detection @requirement: REQ-PAY-001 - Payment verification Properties: Self-Improvement(+0.5), Self-Organization(+0.3)

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": {
      "pairs": "<pairs>"
    },
    "name": "submit_arbitrage_job"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`pairs`	Yes
`exchanges`	No
`min_spread`	No
`payment_proof`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 12, 2026

TDQS

D1.8/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations provided, and description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or safety. Contains irrelevant lines (Self-Improvement, Self-Organization) that do not aid transparency.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

Extremely short but includes non-standard requirement and property lines that are likely noise. Front-loaded with a functional statement, but extra lines waste space without conveying useful information.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a job submission tool with 4 parameters and an output schema, the description provides almost no context. Does not mention what the job does, how results are obtained (hint: get_job_result sibling), or schema of output.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and description does not explain any of the 4 parameters (pairs, exchanges, min_spread, payment_proof). The description adds no value beyond the schema structure.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States 'Submit Market Arbitrage job', giving a verb and resource, but lacks specificity—does not clarify if this triggers detection or execution. Sibling execute_arbitrage_trade suggests it's for detection, but not explicit.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool over siblings like submit_oracle_job or execute_arbitrage_trade. No context for selecting this alternative.

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