Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hvip MCP Server

hvip MCP Server

by okx-wallet-H
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

okx_delete_subaccount_api_key

Delete an API key from a subaccount on OKX. Provide the subaccount name and API key to remove access.

Instructions

[L:READ] CAT:[账户-子账户] | → 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": {
      "subAcct": "<subAcct>",
      "apiKey": "<apiKey>"
    },
    "name": "okx_delete_subaccount_api_key"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
apiKeyYes需要删除的API Key。必填
subAcctYes子账户名称。必填

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.1

TDQS

D1.9/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose that this tool deletes an API key irreversibly. The '[L:READ]' label falsely implies a read-only operation. Behavioral traits are completely obscured.

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?

The description is extremely short but not effectively concise—it includes cryptic abbreviations and Chinese text without clear English meaning. It does not efficiently convey the tool's purpose.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description should provide comprehensive context. It fails to explain return values, side effects, prerequisites (beyond a vague 'call agent_catalog'), or any behavioral traits. Completely inadequate for a destructive operation.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with Chinese descriptions for both parameters (subAcct, apiKey). The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning; it simply directs to call agent_catalog. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as schema already documents the parameters.

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 includes a misleading '[L:READ]' label conflicting with the 'delete' action in the name, and the Chinese category and instruction to call agent_catalog first without clarifying what the tool does. Purpose is unclear and contradictory.

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?

The description only mentions calling agent_catalog first, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., create, reset, get subaccount API key). No context for appropriate usage.

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