SAP MCP Server

Coingecko Get Pools By Token

coingecko_getPoolsByToken

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get all liquidity pools for a token from CoinGecko on-chain DEX tracker. SAP MCP context: Protocol coingecko; operation class read. Use for off-chain market data such as token prices, trending assets, token info, pools, and OHLCV. Use market data as advisory context. On-chain SAP settlement and escrow state remain authoritative for payments.

SAP MCP execution guidance: Intent: read/discovery workflow. Pricing: paid read-premium; estimate first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool when the runtime cannot replay x402 natively. Routing: paid hosted call; call sap_estimate_tool_cost first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool if the runtime cannot handle x402 natively. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page pagination control for Coingecko Get Pools By Token.
`network`	No	Network Solana network or cluster selector for Coingecko Get Pools By Token.
`tokenAddress`	Yes	Token contract/mint address

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`content`	Yes	MCP content blocks returned to the caller.
`isError`	No	True when the tool result represents an application-level error.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJul 24, 2026

addedInput schema / description

Added value: +"Coingecko Get Pools By Token input schema. Intent: read/discovery workflow. Pricing: paid read-premium; estimate first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool when the runtime cannot replay x402 natively. Routing: paid hosted call; call sap_estimate_tool_cost first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool if the runtime cannot handle x402 natively. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required. Use exact field names from this schema; do not guess aliases or include private key material."

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent. The description adds that data is 'off-chain market data' and 'advisory context', which is useful behavioral context. It also mentions pricing as 'paid read-premium'. No contradiction with annotations.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is significantly longer than necessary due to repetitive SAP MCP execution guidance that appears generic. The core purpose is front-loaded, but the boilerplate adds clutter.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given that an output schema exists, the description adequately states the primary function. However, it lacks details about pagination or network handling beyond what the schema provides. The SAP-specific content does not enhance domain completeness.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (page, network, tokenAddress). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The first sentence clearly states 'Get all liquidity pools for a token' with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling coingecko tools like getTokenPrice and getTokenInfo. However, the purpose is somewhat obscured by extensive SAP MCP boilerplate.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description groups this tool with other market data tools ('token prices, trending assets, token info, pools, and OHLCV') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. The SAP execution guidance is about how to call, not when to choose.

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

All SAP MCP Server 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.