Liqwall market data
REMOTE · LIQWALL.COM
Crypto liquidation maps, liquidations, funding, open interest: 4 tools without a key, 6 with one.
Available components
Last scanned (19 hours ago)
Scores higher than 92% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 7 Nov 2026.
Category Crypto and Web3
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically against the live server, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Endpoint Security80
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- No authorisation is required to call this server. Nothing on it is marked destructive, but we can't show that an anonymous caller can only read: full credit needs the server to list at least one tool and every tool to be verifiably read-only. We use a best-effort check of tool names and descriptions to tell read-only tools from tools that change things, so some genuinely read-only tools may not get full credit. Names that start with a read verb (get, list, read, search and similar) and accurate readOnlyHint annotations help. Meet that to earn full credit, or require authorisation. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Partial
- HTTPS is enforced; there's no plaintext access path. View diagnostics → Pass
- The HSTS (Strict-Transport-Security) header is present. View diagnostics → Pass
- DNSSEC check failed: this domain isn't protected by DNSSEC. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability72
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 739 tokens (~184/item across 4 items; 4 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management90
- Stability observed for 27 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage100
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 100% of tool parameters carry a description.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 4 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 5 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
Checks we ran (13)
- TLS certificate
- Authorization
- HTTPS
- HSTS header
- DNSSEC
- Transport
- Schema quality
- Stability
- Tool coverage
- Injection markers
- Destructive annotations
- Judged manipulation
- MCP protocol
Does not apply to this hosted endpoint (2)
- Supply Chain SecurityScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
- Provenance & TransparencyScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
The score does not measure everything. What the score does not measure →
Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 7 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 87 to 90. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 26 days of observed history at the previous scan, 27 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 6 Nov 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 5 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 73 to 77. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 22 days of observed history at the previous scan, 23 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 1 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 67 to 70. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 20 days of observed history at the previous scan, 21 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 30 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 60 to 63. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 18 days of observed history at the previous scan, 19 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 28 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 53 to 57. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 16 days of observed history at the previous scan, 17 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 26 Oct 26 +1
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.
Captured 7 Nov 2026 · Probed https://liqwall.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=liqwall.com | CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 11 Oct 2026 | 9 Jan 2027 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 5eb36fc7da4a4dc9dcfad2fb505f429ae19 |
| SANs: liqwall.com, www.liqwall.com | ||||||
| CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 4ebd24947e24d394802d84a52fd5b319 |
| CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | RSA 4096 | SHA256-RSA | f24b6d17f9d9ad7cb1c9fea78782699f |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of liqwall.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | Trust anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | DS published | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| liqwall.com. | No DS | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication No authorisation required
The endpoint answered without asking for a token. Anyone who knows the URL can reach it.
| Result | No authorisation required |
|---|---|
| HTTP status | 200 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=31536000 |
| content-security-policy | default-src 'self'; script-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline'; style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline'; img-src 'self' data: blob:; font-src 'self' data:; connect-src 'self' https://api.binance.com https://fapi.binance.com https://api.hyperliquid.xyz wss://stream.binance.com:9443 wss://fstream.binance.com wss://api.hyperliquid.xyz; frame-src 'self'; frame-ancestors 'self' https://web.telegram.org; base-uri 'self'; form-action 'self'; object-src 'none' |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
| permissions-policy | camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=(), payment=(), usb=() |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://liqwall.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://liqwall.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://liqwall.com/mcp |
The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →
derivatives Funding, open interest, long/short ~146
Funding rates, open interest and the long/short ratio of perpetual futures, for one coin or for the ten largest coins by open interest. Use it for questions like "what is the funding rate of ETH", "is open interest growing", "are traders long or short". Returns current values: the Binance funding rate and the average across exchanges per 8 hours, open interest in USD with its change over 24 hours and over the last hour, the share of Binance accounts that are long, the long/short ratio and the share of top traders' positions in longs.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| coin | string | – | Coin ticker such as BTC, ETH or SOL; omit it for the ten largest coins |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
fear_greed Fear and Greed Index ~88
The crypto Fear and Greed Index: the mood of the market right now on a scale from 0 (extreme fear) to 100 (extreme greed), for the whole market or for BTC, ETH or SOL, with the values a day, a week and a month ago.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| coin | string | – | BTC, ETH or SOL; omit it for the whole crypto market |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
liquidation_map Liquidation map ~218
Where forced liquidations stand around the current price of one market: USD amounts of long liquidations below the price and of short liquidations above it, on Hyperliquid (crypto, stocks, indices and commodities) and across large exchanges (Binance, OKX, Bybit, Hyperliquid, Gate). Use it for questions like "where are the liquidation levels for BTC", "where do longs get liquidated", "what is the nearest liquidation cluster". Returns one current snapshot: the price, totals within a few percent of the price, the largest levels on each side with their distance from the price, and the URL of the live map. An unknown market returns the list of valid ones.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| coin | string | yes | Market ticker: BTC, ETH, SOL, HYPE, XRP, DOGE … or a Hyperliquid market such as XAU (gold), CL (crude oil), SP500, NVDA, TSLA. Names such as Bitcoin or Gold and pair names such as BTCUSDT are accepte… |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
liquidations Liquidations ~136
How much was liquidated: the last 24 hours and the last hour, longs against shorts, for the whole crypto market or for one coin. Use it for questions like "how much was liquidated today", "were longs or shorts liquidated", "which exchange had the most liquidations". Returns the totals, the split by coin (whole market) or by exchange (one coin), the largest liquidations of the last hour, and the URL of the page.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| coin | string | – | One of BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, DOGE, HYPE, BNB; omit it for the whole crypto market |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Liqwall market data MCP server?
Liqwall market data is a hosted endpoint at https://liqwall.com/mcp, so there is nothing to install locally. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
remote · liqwall.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-liqwall-market-data 'https://liqwall.com/mcp'
What is the Liqwall market data MCP server?
Liqwall market data is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.liqwall/market-data. Crypto liquidation maps, liquidations, funding, open interest: 4 tools without a key, 6 with one. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://liqwall.com/mcp).
Is the Liqwall market data MCP server safe to use?
Liqwall market data scores 86 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.
What tools does the Liqwall market data MCP server expose?
Liqwall market data exposes 4 tools: liquidation_map, liquidations, derivatives, fear_greed. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 588 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Liqwall market data MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Liqwall market data without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Liqwall market data MCP server still maintained?
Liqwall market data is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 7 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.
What did VerifyMCP test on the Liqwall market data MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 13 checks on Liqwall market data, covering TLS certificate, Authorization, HTTPS, HSTS header and 9 more. Supply Chain Security and Provenance & Transparency do not apply to a hosted endpoint, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.