whale-data

Per-venue funding matrix

funding_matrix

Read-onlyIdempotent

Per-venue funding rates for one pair, side by side, with the predicted next rate and payout time where the venue provides it. Use this when the user asks about funding across exchanges, where funding is most extreme, or where perp longs vs shorts are paying ("compare BTC funding across venues", "which venue has the richest funding"). For the single average funding on a coin alongside price/OI/whales, market_brief already includes it; for whether funding is unusual vs the coin's history, market_history/market_extremes carry the comparison. On the free plans BTC in full and any other pair as a headline. Descriptive market data only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`coin`	No	Alias for pair.
`pair`	No	Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. On the free plans BTC answers in full and any other coin as a headline. Rates come back per exchange at that exchange's own interval_h, so magnitudes are not comparable across rows without normalising first.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	One line saying what the numbers cover, or why there are none. Read it before reporting any zero as a market reading.
`pair`	No	The pair these rates belong to.
`available`	No	False when this lane could not answer: a producer is dark, the pair sits outside this plan, or the argument named something we do not carry. Absent or true means the numbers are a real reading, not a guess.
`per_venue`	No	One row per exchange: the exchange name, its current funding rate, its predicted next rate where it publishes one, the next payout time, and interval_h. Rates are per that exchange own interval, so magnitudes are not comparable across rows until they are normalised.
`updated_at`	No	When these rates were read.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 15, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / pair / description

Previous value: -"Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. Every streamed pair answers keyless. Rates come back per exchange at that exchange's own interval_h, so magnitudes are not comparable across rows without normalising first."New value: +"Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. On the free plans BTC answers in full and any other coin as a headline. Rates come back per exchange at that exchange's own interval_h, so magnitudes are not comparable across rows without normalising first."

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 13, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / pair / description

Added value: +"Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. Every streamed pair answers keyless. Rates come back per exchange at that exchange's own interval_h, so magnitudes are not comparable across rows without normalising first."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "available": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "False when this lane could not answer: a producer is dark, the pair sits outside this plan, or the argument named something we do not carry. Absent or true means the numbers are a real reading, not a guess."
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "One line saying what the numbers cover, or why there are none. Read it before reporting any zero as a market reading."
+    },
+    "pair": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "The pair these rates belong to."
+    },
+    "per_venue": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "items": {},
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "One row per exchange: the exchange name, its current funding rate, its predicted next rate where it publishes one, the next payout time, and interval_h. Rates are per that exchange own interval, so magnitudes are not comparable across rows until they are normalised."
+    },
+    "updated_at": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "number"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "When these rates were read."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses that predicted rates are only returned 'where the venue provides it', notes free-plan limitations ('On the free plans BTC in full and any other pair as a headline'), and states 'Descriptive market data only'. This aligns with readOnlyHint=true and adds context (e.g., predictive nature, plan-based behavior) beyond the annotations.

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 a single paragraph but packs purpose, usage scenarios, alternatives, and a free-plan caveat. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, though slightly long; every sentence earns its place, so it is appropriately concise.

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 presence of a detailed input schema, an output schema, and annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, alternatives, behavioral caveats, and plan-based limitations. Nothing an agent needs to decide whether to call this tool or how to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

The schema description already covers 100% of parameter meaning, including default behavior, bare-symbol interpretation, and free-plan effects. The tool description only refers to 'one pair' without adding any parameter-specific semantics, thus meeting the baseline for high schema coverage but not enriching it further.

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 states a specific resource ('Per-venue funding rates for one pair, side by side') and the output nature (predicted next rate and payout time where available). It provides concrete usage examples ('compare BTC funding across venues') that clearly distinguish it from market_brief and market_history, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 says 'Use this when the user asks about funding across exchanges, where funding is most extreme, or where perp longs vs shorts are paying'. It names alternatives (market_brief for single average funding, market_history/market_extremes for historical comparisons) and explains what they cover, so the agent knows exactly when to choose this tool over others.

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

All whale-data 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.

Resources

Need Help?