Skip to main content
Glama
lucaluca-04

Hyperliquid MCP Updated

by lucaluca-04

Related Servers

Alternatives to Hyperliquid MCP Updated

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol server providing comprehensive tools to access real-time market data, trading information, user positions, and analytics for the Hyperliquid perpetual futures exchange.
      5
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A read-only MCP server for Hyperliquid that provides public market data (prices, order books, funding) and any wallet's positions, orders, and fills via MCP tools, without requiring a private key.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A read-only MCP server for querying Hyperliquid perp markets, funding rates, order books, candles, and account positions/fills/funding for any address, without needing API keys or wallets.
      8
      30 npm
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Provides AI agents read-only, keyless access to Hyperliquid market data, funding rates, account risk, and HyperEVM token transfers through MCP tools, with caching and rate limiting to protect upstream APIs.
      12
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for the Hyperliquid decentralized exchange, enabling AI assistants to perform trading operations, manage accounts, and retrieve market data.
      3
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables read-only access to Hyperliquid's public market, user, vault, and staking data via 61 MCP tools, covering perpetuals, spot, and borrow-lend information.
      MIT

    TDQS

    C2.5/5.0

    Scored across 41 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools target distinct data types, but several near-duplicates exist (e.g., hl_open_orders vs hl_frontend_open_orders; hl_user_fills vs hl_user_fills_by_time; hl_meta vs hl_meta_and_asset_ctxs). Descriptions help differentiate them, but an agent could still easily misselect between pairs that differ only in subtle scope or parameters.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools consistently use the 'hl_' prefix with snake_case and descriptive noun phrases (e.g., hl_user_funding_history, hl_candles, hl_spot_meta). The naming pattern is highly predictable and uniform across all 41 tools.

    Tool Count3/5

    41 tools is a large surface, but it reflects the broad Hyperliquid API info endpoints. However, many tools are near variants of one another (meta, meta_and_asset_ctxs, user_fills variants), inflating the count and making navigation more difficult than necessary.

    Completeness2/5

    The toolset covers an extensive range of read-only query endpoints, but entirely lacks any write/trading tools (order placement, cancellation, transfers, staking actions). For a trading-focused server, this is a significant gap that would prevent agents from executing core workflows.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues