Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hvip MCP Server

hvip MCP Server

by okx-wallet-H
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

okx_position_builder

Construct and calculate OKX trading positions by submitting a JSON string of trial parameters. Streamline position setup with structured input.

Instructions

[L:READ] CAT:[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": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "okx_position_builder"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYes试算参数JSON字符串。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 offers no behavioral traits beyond the unclear '[L:READ]' tag. There is no mention of side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what the tool does to state. The description is utterly insufficient for behavioral disclosure.

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 at the cost of clarity. It front-loads tags but provides little useful content. Conciseness is only valuable when it maintains informativeness; here it leaves the agent guessing.

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 the tool's likely complexity (position builder with parameters), the description is grossly incomplete. It lacks an explanation of return values, how to construct the 'body' parameter, and what constitutes a valid request. The single prerequisite does not compensate for the missing context.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with a description for 'body' ('试算参数JSON字符串。必填'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the semantic load.

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 is cryptic, using tags like '[L:READ]' and 'CAT:[账户]' without explaining what the tool does. It mentions a prerequisite but fails to state the tool's function clearly. The name suggests position building, but the description doesn't confirm or elaborate, leaving the purpose vague.

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 only guidance is '请先调用 agent_catalog', which indicates a prerequisite but provides no context about when to use this tool versus siblings like okx_get_positions or okx_get_position_builder_graph. There is no discussion of alternatives or exclusions.

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