Skip to main content
Glama

whale-data

by com.coinlobster

Market history

market_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

Daily history: funding rate, open interest, price and liquidation totals for one pair (archived since 2026-03-18), or daily whale buy/sell flow for one coin (since 2026-06-18). Keyless calls cover 30 days; a paid developer plan reaches the full archive. Descriptive market data only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
coinNoRead the daily whale buy and sell flow lane for one coin instead, for example BTC, recorded since 2026-06-18. Passing coin selects that lane and pair is then ignored. This is the one tool here where coin and pair are different questions, not two spellings of one.
daysNoHow many recorded days to return. Defaults to the whole window, which is also the ceiling: 30 keyless and 400 on a developer plan. Asking for more returns the cap, and the payload says so in `capped`. Both lanes settle several days behind live by design, so read as_of and data_age_days before calling any of it current.
pairNoRead the daily market lane for one pair: funding, open interest, price and liquidation totals, recorded since 2026-03-18. For example ETH/USD; a bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD, and BTC/USD is the default. Ignored when coin is passed, because coin selects the other lane.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
coinNoThe coin, when the daily whale-flow lane was read.
pairNoThe pair, when the daily market lane was read.
as_ofNoThe newest day in this reply. Not today: both lanes settle several days behind live by design.
priceNoDaily price readings.
staleNoTrue only when the lane is further back than its own settle horizon explains.
cappedNoPresent only when an argument was cut down to a ceiling. Absent means nothing was clamped, so a smaller number than you asked for is the data and not a limit.
fundingNoDaily funding readings, oldest first, each carrying its own coverage evidence.
availableNoFalse 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.
depth_noteNoHow far back the data behind this answer reaches.
stale_noteNoPresent when stale is true: how far past the horizon it has fallen.
access_noteNoWhat this connection could not return and what lifts it. Always pass this on to the user: it is the only place that information appears.
liquidationsNoDaily forced-close totals.
coverage_noteNoPresent when stale is false: why the newest day is not today, and that these days must not be described as current.
data_age_daysNoHow many days back as_of sits.
days_returnedNoHow many recorded days came back.
open_interestNoDaily open interest readings.
hour_of_day_utcNoWhat a typical hour looks like for this coin, as medians per UTC hour. Absent under 14 recorded days.
whale_flow_dailyNoDaily whale buy and sell dollars, when the coin lane was read.
expected_lag_daysNoHow far behind live this lane is meant to run, so a healthy lag can be told from a stopped one.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context: data is archived since specific dates, keyless calls are capped at 30 days and the payload reports caps via 'capped', and both lanes settle several days behind live data. This goes well beyond what annotations provide and is not contradicted by them.

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 concise and front-loaded, using three sentences to communicate the two modes, archive dates, access limits, and data nature. Every sentence adds essential information without redundancy or fluff.

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's two-mode complexity, the description covers access tiers, data lag, and the distinct handling of coin vs pair. Since an output schema exists, the lack of return-value detail is acceptable. Annotations cover safety, and the description fills the behavioral context, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke.

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%, and each parameter has a detailed description explaining its meaning and defaults. The tool description further clarifies the relationship between 'coin' and 'pair' as distinct questions and how they interact (coin overrides pair), adding extra semantic depth beyond the schema. This justifies a score above the baseline of 3.

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 the tool provides daily historical data for either market metrics (funding, open interest, price, liquidations) for a pair, or whale buy/sell flow for a coin, with archive start dates. It clearly distinguishes the two usage modes and is specific about the resource and data type.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context on access limits (keyless 30 days, paid plan full archive) and notes the data is descriptive only, implying it is for historical reference rather than live trading. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or give when-not-to-use guidance, so it stops short of a full 5.

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

All whale-data toolsInspect
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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools share the same broad purpose domains, such as market_digest vs market_overview vs market_snapshot and whale_context vs whale_profile vs whale_flow, making selection genuinely ambiguous for an agent. The long descriptions help separate them, but the sheer number of overlapping 'one-call' market and whale views still invites misselection, and whale_tape is a direct duplicate alias.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names are consistently snake_case and mostly follow a clear domain-prefix pattern: market_*, whale_*, hl_*, defi_*. Minor deviations like liquidations vs market_liquidations, liq_zones, my_access, and the deprecated whale_tape keep it from a perfect score, but the overall convention is predictable and readable.

Tool Count2/5

With 30 tools, the server exceeds the reasonable upper bound and feels heavy even for a broad data domain. Many tools could be consolidated—for instance, several one-call market summary tools and multiple whale-flow variants—without losing capability.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers an impressively wide range of whale and market data: news, liquidations, funding, DEX activity, Hyperliquid wallets, market scans, history, and plan access. There are minor gaps such as no general price/OHLC history or per-wallet trade history beyond swaps and fills, but agents can work around these using the existing surface.

Resources