Crypto Data & Market Analysis Agent

get_derivatives

Read-onlyIdempotent

Venue-by-venue breakdown for a single coin: what each major liquid venue — Binance, Bybit, OKX and Hyperliquid, the largest perpetual DEX — shows for funding and open interest, taken from that venue's largest-open-interest perpetual. Returns the per-venue rows plus the average funding, total open interest in USD and the funding spread. Reach for this when divergence between venues matters — one venue far more positive or negative than the rest signals localised positioning rather than market consensus. Takes one coin only; to sweep several at once, call get_derivatives_aggregate. Funding is returned in PERCENT per 8 hours (0.0061 means 0.0061%, not 0.61%) and also ANNUALIZED as a percent per year, so it can be compared directly against any other yield; open interest is in USD. Errors if the coin has no major-venue data. Current snapshot.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`symbol`	Yes	Coin or pair, e.g. BTC, BTCUSDT, ETH

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`coin`	Yes
`perExchange`	Yes	Per-venue breakdown, from each venue's largest-open-interest perpetual.
`exchangeCount`	Yes	How many major venues backed the numbers.
`fundingSpread`	No	Highest minus lowest venue funding. A wide spread marks localised positioning.
`avgFundingRate`	No	Percent per 8 hours. 0.0067 means 0.0067%, not 0.67%.
`totalOpenInterestUsd`	No	Summed across the major venues.
`avgFundingAnnualizedPct`	No	The same funding as a yearly percentage, comparable to any other yield.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it explains the units (funding as percent per 8 hours and annualized, OI in USD), the error condition for coins without major-venue data, and confirms it's a current snapshot. 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is approximately 100 words, well-structured with the primary purpose front-loaded. Every sentence contributes essential information—venue list, data returned, usage guidance, units, error handling. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (not shown), the description appropriately omits return value details. It covers input requirements, behavioral constraints, error conditions, and usage rationale. It is fully complete for a read-only data retrieval tool.

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?

The schema covers the single parameter 'symbol' with description. The description adds concrete examples (BTC, BTCUSDT, ETH) and clarifies that only one coin is accepted. This provides useful context beyond the schema definition.

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 returns a venue-by-venue breakdown of funding and open interest for a single coin from major venues (Binance, Bybit, OKX, Hyperliquid). It specifies the exact data returned (per-venue rows, averages, total OI, funding spread) and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_derivatives_aggregate by noting it handles one coin only.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: 'Reach for this when divergence between venues matters' and when to use the alternative: 'to sweep several at once, call get_derivatives_aggregate'. This provides clear context for decision-making.

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

All Crypto Data & Market Analysis Agent 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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct data domain—network health, market prices, news, DeFi, derivatives per-venue vs aggregate, economic calendar, ETH address, whale flows, execution cost, sentiment, implied volatility, macro rates, market brief, dominance, history, and traditional market quotes. The only similar pair (get_derivatives vs get_derivatives_aggregate) is clearly differentiated by level of detail, so there is no real ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the get_<domain> pattern with descriptive noun phrases (e.g., get_btc_network, get_eth_whale_flows, get_market_brief). No mixed verb styles or casing conventions appear, making the naming fully predictable and consistent.

Tool Count4/5

At 17 tools, the surface is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range, but the breadth of the domain—spot, derivatives, on-chain, macro, sentiment, and execution—justifies each tool. It's borderline but each tool earns its place in a comprehensive market analysis agent.

Completeness5/5

The toolset covers nearly every major facet of crypto market analysis: prices, history, dominance, derivatives, on-chain activity, DeFi, macro, economic calendar, sentiment, implied volatility, execution cost, and a composite brief. Minor gaps like historical OHLCV or multi-chain on-chain analytics are not critical given the agent's stated focus.

Resources

Need Help?