YourAITools MCP Hub

SmartPerps: Most one-sided coins (smart money)

smart_money_scan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Same as GET, POST {"limit":10}

[SmartPerps via YourAITools MCP Hub] No free tier (paid route only). Paid: scan $0.03 per call, with a credits key (Authorization: Bearer yatc_...) or x402 (USDC; the hub returns the payment terms). Failed tool calls aren't charged: credits are refunded automatically and x402 payments only settle on success.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "smart_money_scan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tier`	No	Paid tier: scan $0.03. Default scan.
`limit`	No	Rows per list, 1-25 (default 10)
`min_traders`	No	Only rank coins held by at least this many cohort accounts, 2-50 (default 3)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 30, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / limit / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  10
+]
```
First observedOct 24, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds genuinely valuable behavior: paid-only route, $0.03 per call, credits-key or x402 auth, and the fact that failed calls are not charged (auto-refund for credits, settlement only on success for x402). That is real operational context an agent needs before invoking a paid tool.

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 first line is cryptic and occupies the highest-value position, while the actual purpose is never stated. The billing paragraph is well-formed but disproportionately long relative to a description that says nothing about the operation itself.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no output schema and a novel concept ('one-sided coins', 'smart money cohort'), the description should explain what is returned and what the cohort/threshold means. It instead covers only payment logistics, leaving the core data model unexplained.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so tier, limit, and min_traders are already documented with enums and ranges. The description's '{"limit":10}' merely echoes the schema example and adds no new semantics; baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The body opens with 'Same as GET, POST {"limit":10}', which is API plumbing syntax rather than a statement of what the tool does. The only real purpose signal comes from the title ('Most one-sided coins (smart money)'), and the description never explains what a 'one-sided coin' scan returns or how it differs from sibling perp tools.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this versus smart_money_bias, perp_positioning, or perp_funding_scan, nor any prerequisites beyond the billing mechanics. An agent must guess the scenario from the title alone.

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

All YourAITools MCP Hub tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?