x402 Bazaar

morpho_liquidatable

Read-onlyIdempotent

Which Base Morpho positions are liquidatable right now? — Built for liquidator / MEV searchers. Reconstructs the active borrower set on a Morpho Blue market from Borrow events, prices every position onchain in one multicall, and ranks them by liquidation health — flagging positions liquidatable NOW (health <= 1.0) and those one small move away, with the collateral price drop that tips each over. market= optional (defaults cbBTC/USDC), maxHealth= cutoff (default 1.1). Not financial advice. Priced $0.06 per call over x402 on Base; send a prepaid x-credit-token header for unlimited calls, or get 1 free call/day per tool. No wallet or API key required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`market`	No	Morpho market id (optional)
`maxHealth`	No	Health cutoff (optional)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	No	The result payload. Shape is service-specific; every field is documented in the tool description.
`service`	No	The service id that answered.
`checkedAt`	No	ISO-8601 timestamp of when the underlying reads were taken.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed1 schema field changedAug 31, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / data / description

Previous value: -"The result payload. Shape is service-specific; every field is documented in the service description above."New value: +"The result payload. Shape is service-specific; every field is documented in the tool description."

Changed1 schema field changedAug 31, 2026
- removedOutput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "data"
-]
```
AddedAug 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description richly discloses behavior beyond the readOnly/openWorld/idempotent annotations: it reconstructs the borrower set from Borrow events, prices positions in a single multicall, ranks by liquidation health, flags health <= 1.0 as liquidatable now, and reports the collateral price drop that tips each position over. It also covers cost and access requirements, which is highly transparent.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with a clear use-case question and keeps technical details in a dense but efficient block. It is slightly overstuffed with commercial details like pricing and 'Not financial advice,' but these are minor and do not prevent quick understanding.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with two optional parameters, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description covers everything an agent needs: input defaults, behavior, ranking logic, output meaning, and cost/access constraints. Nothing essential is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Although the schema already covers both parameters, the description adds essential meaning: market is optional and defaults to cbBTC/USDC, and maxHealth is the health cutoff defaulting to 1.1. This lets an agent correctly omit parameters and understand their effect on results.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description opens with a precise question, 'Which Base Morpho positions are liquidatable right now?', naming the specific resource (Base Morpho positions) and action (identify liquidatable ones). It clearly differentiates this from general health or vault tools by targeting liquidator/MEV searchers and describing the liquidation-health ranking output.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description states the intended audience and use case: 'Built for liquidator / MEV searchers.' It provides clear context for when to call it, along with optional parameter defaults and cutoff semantics. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when to use a sibling tool like morpho_health instead.

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

All x402 Bazaar tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Despite excellent per-tool descriptions, the set contains many near-overlapping tools: rug_score, batch_risk, pre_trade_gate, and deep_dd all assess token risk; wallet_portfolio, wallet_networth, and wallet_tokens all list balances; b20_safety, b20_gate, and b20_dossier overlap heavily; url_extract, web_extract, ai_extract, and url_to_json also blur boundaries. An agent would struggle to consistently pick the right tool without reading every description.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming is overwhelmingly consistent snake_case verb_noun (token_price, rug_score, address_trust, file_convert, safe_to_send). Minor deviations: noun-only names like holders, basename, deep_dd, business_days, and new_tokens, plus the abbreviation deep_dd, slightly break the pattern.

Tool Count1/5

137 tools is far beyond the 50+ extreme-mismatch threshold. Even as a marketplace bazaar, this is an enormous, unwieldy surface where many tools overlap and each contributes only a sliver of unique value.

Completeness4/5

For the apparent purpose — a pay-per-call bazaar covering on-chain analysis, wallet intelligence, token due diligence, plus generic text/web/finance utilities — the surface is extensive and covers most read-only workflows with few dead ends. Minor gaps exist (no historical price series, no swap execution, no true on-chain write actions), but the set is not severely incomplete for its stated niche.

Resources

Need Help?