Tachyo

marketsummary__attention_vs_price_divergence

[marketsummary] Which coins are looked-at but haven't pumped yet — and which pumped quietly. Fuses our source-secret attention with price: 'coiled' = rising attention, price still flat/down; 'quiet_mover' = pumped on thin attention. Free = count + 3 names; premium = the ranked list with type + numbers. Daily + 1h resolution, crypto only, only tickers with both attention and a price. Not advice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`payment`	No
`session_token`	No

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, if it requires authentication beyond session_token, or any side effects. The 'Not advice' disclaimer is present but insufficient for behavioral traits.

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?

The description is relatively concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. It defines terms, tiers, and constraints without excessive verbosity, though the multiple lines could be slightly more structured.

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?

The description covers output format per tier, asset type, and resolution. However, with no output schema, it lacks details on exact response structure, error handling, or what happens when no data matches.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not clarify the two parameters (payment, session_token). The reference to 'free' vs 'premium' hints at payment's role but is not explicit; session_token is completely unexplained.

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 clearly states the tool identifies coins with attention-price divergence ('coiled' and 'quiet_mover'), defines these terms, and distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on divergence rather than raw attention or trends.

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 mentions crypto-only and provides resolution details, but does not explain when to use this tool versus siblings like 'get_attention_shifts' or 'get_trending'. No explicit when-not or alternative guidance.

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

All Tachyo tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct aspect of market analysis or token safety, with clear descriptions that avoid overlap. Tools like find_longs and find_shorts are opposites, and other get_* tools each address unique metrics (e.g., buzz, attention shifts, smart money flow). No two tools have ambiguous boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tools are prefixed by category (marketsummary__, tokensafety__, verify__), and most use a verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_liquidity, find_longs). However, there is some variation: 'ask_market', 'track_narrative', and longer names like 'attention_vs_price_divergence' break the pure 'get_' pattern. Overall, the naming is logical and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

With 24 tools, the server covers a wide range of crypto market analysis, from general summaries to specific signals (e.g., conviction gap, smart money flow) and token safety. The count is well-scoped for the domain; each tool serves a clear purpose without being excessive.

Completeness5/5

The tool set is comprehensive for a market analysis server: it includes natural language querying, trend detection, sentiment, liquidity, whale activity, safety checks, and wallet verification for premium access. Missing trading actions are outside the stated purpose, so no gaps are apparent.

Resources

Need Help?