Draconic Market Intelligence

Get Coverage

get_coverage

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check exact supported instruments for one requested timeframe (default 5m), with each source timestamp. Availability means stored data exists, not a guaranteed live feed. Check each additional timeframe separately. Returns no prices and consumes no credit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`market`	No	Optionally limit the result to one market. Omit it to return the complete current coverage universe.
`timeframe`	No	A timeframe currently computed by Draconic.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`markets`	Yes
`instruments`	Yes
`generated_at`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 17, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "generated_at": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "instruments": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "available": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "market": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "request_coverage_url": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "source_updated_at": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "symbol": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "timeframe": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "symbol",
+          "market",
+          "available",
+          "timeframe"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "markets": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "available": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "available_count": {
+            "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+            "minimum": 0,
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "configured_count": {
+            "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+            "minimum": 0,
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "market": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "market",
+          "configured_count",
+          "available_count",
+          "available"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "generated_at",
+    "markets",
+    "instruments"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond those hints: no consumption of credit, no price data returned, and the exact meaning of availability.

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?

Three focused sentences with no wasted wording. The core action and scope are front-loaded, followed by necessary caveats about availability, credit, and prices.

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?

With a full output schema, fully documented parameters, and rich annotations, the description is complete. It explains the key non-obvious semantics (stored vs. live data, no credit cost) an agent needs to invoke and interpret the tool correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by noting the default timeframe (5m), which is absent from the schema, and by reinforcing that each timeframe must be checked separately.

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 uses a specific verb ('Check') with a precise resource ('exact supported instruments for one requested timeframe') and clarifies scope ('Availability means stored data exists, not a guaranteed live feed'). It is clearly distinct from its siblings, which concern account usage and questioning Draconic.

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 gives clear operating context: check one timeframe at a time, handle additional timeframes separately, and interpret 'availability' as stored data rather than live feed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use this tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Draconic Market Intelligence tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?