Skip to main content
Glama
tanmay4l

Futarchy MCP Server

by tanmay4l

sellInFailMarket

Execute token sales in the fail market for specific proposals on the Solana-based Futarchy protocol, enabling users to manage DAO trading positions.

Instructions

Sell tokens in the fail market for a proposal

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
proposalIdYesThe ID of the proposal to trade in
amountYesAmount to sell
userYesUser's public key

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the sellInFailMarket MCP tool. It calls the FutarchyApiClient.sellInFailMarket method and formats the response as MCP content or error.
    async ({ proposalId, amount, user }) => {
      try {
        const response = await apiClient.sellInFailMarket(proposalId, amount, user);
        
        if (!response.success) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text" as const,
                text: response.error || 'Unknown error',
              },
            ],
            isError: true,
          };
        }
        
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text" as const,
              text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2),
            },
          ],
        };
      } catch (error: any) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text" as const,
              text: `Error selling in fail market: ${error.message || 'Unknown error'}`,
            },
          ],
          isError: true,
        };
      }
    }
  • The registration of the sellInFailMarket tool on the MCP server, including name, description, input schema, and handler reference.
    server.tool(
      "sellInFailMarket",
      "Sell tokens in the fail market for a proposal",
      {
        proposalId: z.string().describe("The ID of the proposal to trade in"),
        amount: z.number().describe("Amount to sell"),
        user: z.string().describe("User's public key"),
      },
      async ({ proposalId, amount, user }) => {
        try {
          const response = await apiClient.sellInFailMarket(proposalId, amount, user);
          
          if (!response.success) {
            return {
              content: [
                {
                  type: "text" as const,
                  text: response.error || 'Unknown error',
                },
              ],
              isError: true,
            };
          }
          
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text" as const,
                text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2),
              },
            ],
          };
        } catch (error: any) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text" as const,
                text: `Error selling in fail market: ${error.message || 'Unknown error'}`,
              },
            ],
            isError: true,
          };
        }
      }
    );
  • Zod input schema for the sellInFailMarket tool parameters.
    {
      proposalId: z.string().describe("The ID of the proposal to trade in"),
      amount: z.number().describe("Amount to sell"),
      user: z.string().describe("User's public key"),
    },
  • Helper function in FutarchyApiClient that makes HTTP POST request to the backend API to sell tokens in the fail market.
    async sellInFailMarket(proposalId: string, amount: number, userPublicKey: string): Promise<Response> {
      try {
        const response = await fetch(`${this.baseUrl}/proposals/${proposalId}/sell-fail`, {
          method: 'POST',
          headers: {
            'Content-Type': 'application/json',
          },
          body: JSON.stringify({
            amount,
            user: userPublicKey
          })
        });
    
        if (!response.ok) {
          throw new Error(`HTTP error! Status: ${response.status}`);
        }
        const data = await response.json();
        
        return {
          success: true,
          data: data
        };
      } catch (error: any) {
        return {
          success: false,
          error: error.message || 'Failed to sell in fail market'
        };
      }
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't mention if this is a destructive/mutative operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what happens upon execution (e.g., token transfer, market impact).

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, efficient sentence with zero waste—it directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words or fluff.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the outcome (e.g., what 'sell' entails, return values, or error conditions), leaving gaps in understanding for an AI agent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying 'proposalId' relates to a proposal in the fail market, but this is minimal value over the schema.

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 description clearly states the action ('sell tokens') and the context ('in the fail market for a proposal'), which is specific and actionable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'sellInPassMarket', which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 like 'sellInPassMarket' or 'buyInFailMarket'. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing a proposal in a 'fail' state or having tokens to sell.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/tanmay4l/FutarchyMCPServer'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server