whale-data

Squeeze Score (crowding)

squeeze_score

Read-onlyIdempotent

A fused 0-100 crowding read for one pair (funding + long/short accounts + taker imbalance + OI trend) with the overexposed side. Use this when the user asks how crowded or squeeze-prone a coin is, or which side is over-leveraged ("how crowded is BTC", "is ETH set up for a long squeeze"). For WHERE forced closes would land use liq_zones; for forced closes that already happened use liquidations/market_liquidations. Descriptive, never a trade signal or a prediction. Needs a paid plan. 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. A paid plan is needed for any pair here: without one the call is refused before the pair is even read.

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 this crowding read describes.
`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.
`updated_at`	No	When the read was computed.
`access_note`	No	What this connection could not return and what lifts it. Always pass this on to the user: it is the only place that information appears.
`by_exchange`	No	The same read broken out per exchange.
`crowded_side`	No	Which side is overexposed, long or short.
`squeeze_score`	No	Crowding from 0 to 100. Descriptive, not a trade signal.
`long_short_ratio`	No	Long accounts against short accounts.
`taker_buy_sell_ratio`	No	Aggressive buying against aggressive selling.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 2, 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. A developer plan is needed for any pair here: without one the call is refused before the pair is even read."New value: +"Trading pair, for example ETH/USD. A bare symbol like ETH is read as ETH/USD. Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted. A paid plan is needed for any pair here: without one the call is refused before the pair is even read."

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. A developer plan is needed for any pair here: without one the call is refused before the pair is even read."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "access_note": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "What this connection could not return and what lifts it. Always pass this on to the user: it is the only place that information appears."
+    },
+    "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."
+    },
+    "by_exchange": {
+      "description": "The same read broken out per exchange."
+    },
+    "crowded_side": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "Which side is overexposed, long or short."
+    },
+    "long_short_ratio": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "Long accounts against short accounts."
+    },
+    "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 this crowding read describes."
+    },
+    "squeeze_score": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "Crowding from 0 to 100. Descriptive, not a trade signal."
+    },
+    "taker_buy_sell_ratio": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "Aggressive buying against aggressive selling."
+    },
+    "updated_at": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "number"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "When the read was computed."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is known. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: 'Descriptive, never a trade signal or a prediction' and 'Needs a paid plan' (auth requirement), plus the note that the call is refused without a paid plan for any pair. 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is ~80 words, front-loaded with the core function, then use cases, alternatives, and caveats. It is well-structured, but there is minor redundancy between 'Descriptive, never a trade signal or a prediction' and 'Descriptive market data only' that prevents a perfect score.

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?

The description covers when to use the tool, when not to (explicit alternatives), the paid-plan requirement, and its non-predictive nature. An output schema exists, so return format is covered. Nothing essential an agent needs to select and call this tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description repeats rather than extends the parameters: 'coin' as alias and 'pair' details (e.g., 'Defaults to BTC/USD when omitted') are already in the schema. No added semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 function: a 'fused 0-100 crowding read' for one pair, listing the underlying components (funding, long/short accounts, taker imbalance, OI trend) and the overexposed side. It differentiates from siblings by explicitly routing WHERE forced closes land to liq_zones and past forced closes to liquidations/market_liquidations.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this when the user asks how crowded or squeeze-prone a coin is, or which side is over-leveraged,' with concrete example queries. It also names alternatives for other specific intents, so an agent can route correctly.

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?