Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Sato Hub: Build Onchain & Crypto Agents

by ai.satohub
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Has this tool been answering?

onchain_agent_get_listing_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

USE WHEN the question is whether a listing has been answering Sato Hub's daily checks and whether its tool inventory has moved (ANSWERS ONE QUESTION), or how its Sato Score has moved day by day. NOT FOR a feed of events across projects (use onchain_agent_recent_changes instead) or the listing's current record (use onchain_agent_get_resource).

RETURNS a bounded 30-day shape from the listing's observed record — days observed, share of OUR checks that succeeded, current state and streak — plus the MCP tool-inventory changes in the window (date, count after the change, added, removed) and the current Sato Score.

RULE ENFORCED: success_rate_pct is the share of Sato Hub's own checks that succeeded, never "uptime" — a failure can be on our side. At most 30 entries; the daily rows are not returned (rule 24: shape, not rows). Absence of a record is unknown, not down.

Pass score_days to add score_series: the daily Sato Score readings we captured for this listing, up to 90 days without a key (a longer request is clamped, never refused, and score_series_window says what was served; the 180-day chart is on the listing's /verify//history page). A day nobody measured is ABSENT from the array rather than carried forward — a gap is a gap — and every move is labelled project or methodology, the latter meaning Sato Hub revised the scoring rubric that day and the movement is ours.

RETURNS (json): { slug, days, observed: { days_observed, window_days, success_rate_pct, rate_days, rate_window_start, current_state, current_streak_days, last_check }, tool_history: [{ date, count, added, removed }], tools_now, tools_peak, trust_score, trust_tier, score_series, score_series_window, rules, sato_url }. Read-only.

Example: { slug: "jupiter-mcp", days: 30, score_days: 90 }

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoLook-back window in days (1-30, default 30) for the observed record and the tool inventory.
slugYesThe resource slug, e.g. 'coinbase-agentkit'.
score_daysNoInclude the daily Sato Score series over this many days (2-365; up to 90 days are served without a key, a longer request is answered with 90 and says so in score_series_window). A day nobody measured is absent from the series, never carried forward. Omit for no series.
response_formatNoText format; structuredContent is JSON either way.markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / score_days / description
      Previous value: -"Include the daily Sato Score series over this many days (2-365). A day nobody measured is absent from the series, never carried forward. Omit for no series."New value: +"Include the daily Sato Score series over this many days (2-365; up to 90 days are served without a key, a longer request is answered with 90 and says so in score_series_window). A day nobody measured is absent from the series, never carried forward. Omit for no series."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / response_format / description
      Previous value: -"Output format: 'markdown' (default) or 'json'."New value: +"Text format; structuredContent is JSON either way."
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / days / description
      Previous value: -"Look-back window in days (1-30, default 30)."New value: +"Look-back window in days (1-30, default 30) for the observed record and the tool inventory."
    • addedInput schema / properties / score_days
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Include the daily Sato Score series over this many days (2-365). A day nobody measured is absent from the series, never carried forward. Omit for no series.",
+  "maximum": 365,
+  "minimum": 2,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  5. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, yet the description adds substantial behavior: the 30-entry bound, the success_rate_pct semantics rule (never 'uptime'), the score_days clamping (90 without a key, clamped never refused), absent-day semantics, and project-vs-methodology move labels. This is well beyond annotation coverage.

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?

Front-loaded with USE WHEN / NOT FOR / RULES, and each block is dense. It is long, and the RETURNS material is split across a prose paragraph and a duplicated 'RETURNS (json)' shape line, a mild redundancy that costs a point.

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 no output schema, the description carries the full return-shape burden and does so: it enumerates fields (observed, tool_history, score_series, score_series_window, rules, sato_url), defines the enforced success-rate rule, and states the window bounds and gap semantics. Nothing an agent needs to call or interpret it is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it explains that a longer score_days request is clamped (not refused) and surfaced via score_series_window, and that unmeasured days are absent rather than carried forward. That is semantic guidance the schema text does not fully carry.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (listing history over time) and frames the exact question it answers: whether a listing has been answering daily checks, whether its tool inventory moved, and how its Sato Score moved. It explicitly names the siblings it is not (onchain_agent_recent_changes, onchain_agent_get_resource), so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Opens with an explicit USE WHEN clause tied to a single question, then a NOT FOR clause naming two alternatives and the conditions that select them. Nothing about when to prefer this tool is left to inference.

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

All Sato Hub: Build Onchain & Crypto Agents toolsInspect
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