hvip MCP Server

okx_set_copy_settings

Configure copy trading for OKX: set amount type (fixed contracts, fixed amount, ratio), product type (swap/futures), and amount for a lead trader's unique code.

Instructions

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

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "okx_set_copy_settings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`amount`	No	跟单数量
`instType`	No	产品类型
`amountType`	No	数量类型。1=固定张数, 2=固定金额, 3=比例
`uniqueCode`	No	带单员唯一标识码

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.6.1Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description marks this as a write operation ('[L:WRITE]'), but with no annotations provided, this is the only behavioral clue. It does not disclose what side effects occur, whether settings are overwritten, authentication requirements, or rate limits. More detail is needed for a mutation tool.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is extremely concise (single line). It effectively front-loads the category and prerequisite. However, it may be too minimal, missing context that could be helpful without being verbose. It earns no extra points for efficiency.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It explains neither the overall effect of setting copy settings nor the meaning of parameters beyond what the schema already provides. A more comprehensive description is needed for reliable use.

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% and each parameter has a Chinese description in the schema. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level information beyond that. Per guidelines, baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The name 'okx_set_copy_settings' clearly indicates setting copy settings, and the description adds 'CAT:[策略-跟单]' (strategy-following category). It states it's a write operation. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like okx_get_copy_settings, okx_amend_copy_settings, etc.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description explicitly says '→ 请先调用 agent_catalog' (call agent_catalog first), which provides a prerequisite for usage. However, no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like okx_amend_copy_settings or okx_copy_trader is given.

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

Deploy Server