Deriv API와 상호 작용하기 위한 MCP(Model Context Protocol) 서버와 OpenAI 함수 호출 서비스입니다.
활성 심볼 목록
계좌 잔액 가져오기
Related MCP server: Bybit MCP Server
지엑스피1
Docker 이미지를 빌드합니다.
docker build -t deriv-api-mcp .프로젝트 루트에 .env 파일을 만듭니다.
DERIV_API_TOKEN=your_api_key_hereClaude Desktop은 MCP 기능을 완벽하게 지원합니다. 이 서버를 사용하려면 다음 단계를 따르세요.
Claude Desktop 구성에 다음을 추가합니다.
macOS의 경우: ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
cline VSCode에서: /Users/raju/Library/Application Support/Code/User/globalStorage/saoudrizwan.claude-dev/settings/cline_mcp_settings.json
Windows의 경우: %APPDATA%\Claude\claude_desktop_config.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"deriv-api-mcp": {
"command": "uv",
"args": [
"--directory",
"/Users/raju/Sites/deriv/mcp-deriv-api-server",
"run",
"server.py"
]
}
}
}{
"mcpServers": {
"deriv-api-mcp": {
"command": "docker",
"args": [
"run",
"--rm",
"-i",
"deriv-api-mcp"
]
}
}
}Claude Desktop을 다시 시작하세요
서버는 다음과 같은 도구를 제공합니다.
get_active_symbols : 활성 거래 심볼 목록을 가져옵니다.
get_account_balance : 현재 계좌 잔액을 가져옵니다
현재 요금 제한 및 사용 지침은 Deriv API 문서를 참조하세요.
MIT
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
get_account_balanceget_active_symbolsScored across 2 tools
The two tools have completely distinct purposes: one retrieves account balance information, while the other fetches available trading symbols. There is no overlap in functionality, making it impossible to confuse them.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'get_' prefix and snake_case naming. The naming is perfectly uniform across the set.
With only two tools, the server feels severely under-scoped for a Deriv API integration. A financial trading API would typically require many more operations (e.g., place orders, check positions, view history) to be useful.
The toolset is extremely incomplete for a trading API domain. It lacks core operations like creating trades, managing orders, viewing transaction history, or accessing market data beyond symbols. Agents cannot perform meaningful trading workflows.
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
MCP server for OpenMM — exposes market data, account, trading, and strategy tools to AI agents
Trade 16 crypto exchanges + MetaTrader 5 from your AI assistant via one MCP connection.
MCP server for Gainium — manage trading bots, deals, and balances via AI assistants
