Create a new order (limit or market) on a supported exchange
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| side | Yes | Order side: buy or sell | |
| type | Yes | Order type: limit or market | |
| price | No | Order price (required for limit orders, ignored for market orders) | |
| amount | Yes | Order amount in base currency | |
| symbol | Yes | Trading pair symbol (e.g., BTC/USDT, INDY/USDT) | |
| exchange | Yes | Exchange to query. Supported: mexc, gateio, bitget, kraken |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states that an order is created but does not mention execution side effects, exchange confirmation, irreversibility, fees, auth requirements, or what happens after the call. For a financial mutation tool, this is a significant gap.
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?
The description is one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant elaboration. It earns its place by stating the core purpose clearly.
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?
With no annotations and no output schema, the description needs to cover more context, such as return values, order lifecycle, or side effects. It only provides a minimal statement of intent, which is insufficient for a complex financial action like order creation.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters well. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond naming limit and market order types, and it does not compensate or add detail beyond the schema.
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?
The description uses a specific verb ('Create') with a clear resource ('new order') and scope ('limit or market', 'on a supported exchange'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like cancel_order, get_balance, and list_orders.
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?
The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or situations where another tool would be more appropriate. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are clearly distinct, but cancel_all_orders and stop_strategy both cancel all open orders for a trading pair, creating real ambiguity. The grid strategy tools are otherwise well-separated from the general exchange tools, though start_grid_strategy overlaps somewhat with create_order.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern, such as get_ticker, list_orders, create_order, and stop_strategy. There are no mixed conventions or vague generic verbs.
Fifteen tools is at the upper edge of a well-scoped set, but each tool covers a meaningful operation across exchange trading, Cardano DEX data, and grid strategy management. The count feels slightly broad but not bloated.
The server provides solid coverage for trading workflows: market data, order management, balance retrieval, exchange discovery, and grid strategy lifecycle. Minor gaps exist, such as no way to fetch a specific historical order or modify an existing order, but core operations are covered.