AD hyperliquid-api-reference
Compact reference for the Hyperliquid API as the desk uses it - endpoints and envelopes, every /info request type, every /exchange action with its signing scheme, order and status vocabularies, asset ids, tick and lot rules, rate limits, WebSocket subscription list, error strings, and where the official docs are. Use to look up an exact field, request type or limit before writing a call, and to map an error string to its cause.
Compact reference for the Hyperliquid API as the desk uses it - endpoints and envelopes, every /info request type, every /exchange action with its signing…
As a process D 44/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
How to improve
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 44/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 6 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (hyperliquid-api-reference) differs from the folder (hypergrok-hyperliquid-api-reference)
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 100Steps. 25 steps
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3286 tokens
- low 11 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (3 tags): a typed call is more reliable
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 431: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 12 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 25 items
- +4Has examples (0 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.