Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hvip MCP Server

hvip MCP Server

by okx-wallet-H
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

okx_create_quote

Create a quote for an RFQ on OKX by specifying RFQ ID, price, and quantity. Allows responding to quote requests with a firm quote.

Instructions

[L:WRITE] CAT:[策略-RFQ] | → 请先调用 agent_catalog

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": {
      "rfqId": "<rfqId>",
      "quotePx": "<quotePx>",
      "sz": "<sz>"
    },
    "name": "okx_create_quote"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
szYes报价数量。必填
rfqIdYesRFQ ID。必填
quotePxYes报价价格。必填

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.1

TDQS

D1.7/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is destructive, idempotent, or requires prior steps. The 'WRITE' tag only hints at mutation.

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 omits essential information. It is under-specified, not genuinely concise.

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?

The description fails to provide enough context for a write tool with 3 parameters and no output schema. No return value, prerequisites, or error handling is mentioned.

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 coverage is 100% with brief parameter descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description uses cryptic tags like 'L:WRITE' and 'CAT:[策略-RFQ]' but does not explicitly state that the tool creates a quote for an RFQ. The purpose is implied but not clear, scoring low.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like okx_execute_quote or okx_create_rfq. The only hint is to call agent_catalog first, but no context is provided.

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