Aster Finance MCP Server

queryOrder

Check cryptocurrency order status on Aster Finance Futures API using symbol and optional order identifiers to monitor trading positions.

Instructions

Check an order's status.

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": {
      "symbol": "<symbol>"
    },
    "name": "queryOrder"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`orderId`	No
`origClientOrderId`	No
`symbol`	Yes

Implementation Reference

src/index.ts:635-636 (handler)
Handler for the 'queryOrder' tool. Makes a signed GET request to '/fapi/v1/order' endpoint on Aster futures API to query an order's status.
```
case 'queryOrder':
    return makeRequest('GET', '/fapi/v1/order', args, true);
```

src/index.ts:299-307 (schema)

Input schema definition for 'queryOrder' tool: requires 'symbol', optional 'orderId' or 'origClientOrderId'.

inputSchema: {
  type: 'object',
  properties: {
    symbol: { type: 'string' },
    orderId: { type: 'number' },
    origClientOrderId: { type: 'string' },
  },
  required: ['symbol'],
},

src/index.ts:296-308 (registration)

Registration of the 'queryOrder' tool in the MCP server's listTools response, including name, description, and input schema.

{
  name: 'queryOrder',
  description: "Check an order's status.",
  inputSchema: {
    type: 'object',
    properties: {
      symbol: { type: 'string' },
      orderId: { type: 'number' },
      origClientOrderId: { type: 'string' },
    },
    required: ['symbol'],
  },
},

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 22, 2025

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Check an order's status' implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't specify permissions needed, rate limits, error conditions, or what 'status' entails (e.g., pending, filled, canceled). For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves critical behavioral traits unclear.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action, though this brevity comes at the cost of missing details needed for full usability.

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 complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return values, parameter usage, or how this tool differs from siblings. For a query tool in a financial context, more context on behavior and output is needed to be fully actionable.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning none of the three parameters (orderId, origClientOrderId, symbol) are documented in the schema. The description adds no information about these parameters—it doesn't explain what they represent, their formats, or how they interact (e.g., if orderId is optional). This fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'Check an order's status' clearly states the verb ('check') and resource ('order's status'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from similar siblings like 'queryOpenOrder' or 'getAllOrders', leaving ambiguity about scope and differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'queryOpenOrder', 'getAllOrders', and 'getAllOpenOrders', there's no indication of whether this tool checks a single order by ID, filters by symbol, or serves a specific use case, leaving the agent to guess based on parameter names alone.

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