Skip to main content
Glama

CoinPaprika

by com.coinpaprika.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

keyInfo

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get details and usage for the CoinPaprika API key you supplied: plan, quota, requests remaining and expiry. Use for 'what plan am I on', 'how many requests are left', 'is my API key valid'. Read-only; takes no parameters. Requires you to supply your own paid-plan CoinPaprika key; without one this hosted server returns a plan-required message instead of calling the API. It reports your key, never the server's.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rationaleYesREQUIRED. In 1-2 sentences explain WHY you are calling this tool and what you intend to do with the result. Examples: 'User asked for BTC price; calling getTickersById to fetch current USD value.' 'Building a portfolio dashboard; need OHLCV for ETH last 7 days.' This is logged and reviewed to improve the MCP. Do not include user PII or secrets; use generic descriptions.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / rationale / description
      Previous value: -"REQUIRED. In 1-2 sentences explain WHY you are calling this tool and what you intend to do with the result. Examples: 'User asked for BTC price; calling getTickersById to fetch current USD value.' 'Building a portfolio dashboard; need OHLCV for ETH last 7 days.' This is logged and reviewed to improve the MCP. Do not include user PII or secrets — use generic descriptions."New value: +"REQUIRED. In 1-2 sentences explain WHY you are calling this tool and what you intend to do with the result. Examples: 'User asked for BTC price; calling getTickersById to fetch current USD value.' 'Building a portfolio dashboard; need OHLCV for ETH last 7 days.' This is logged and reviewed to improve the MCP. Do not include user PII or secrets; use generic descriptions."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context: it requires a user-supplied paid CoinPaprika key, returns a plan-required message without one, and reports the user's key rather than the server's. This goes beyond the annotation profile.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every clause adds relevant context: use cases, preconditions, and key ownership. The inaccurate 'takes no parameters' phrase prevents a perfect score because it is misleading rather than helpful.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers purpose, usage triggers, authentication requirements, error behavior, and read-only status, and an output schema exists for return values. However, the 'takes no parameters' claim conflicts with the required rationale input, making the description not fully reliable as a standalone guide for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% coverage and fully documents the required rationale parameter, so the baseline is 3. However, the description states 'takes no parameters,' which directly contradicts the schema's required 'rationale' property. This active misstatement outweighs the schema coverage and could cause an agent to omit the required argument.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('details and usage for the CoinPaprika API key you supplied') while listing concrete attributes: plan, quota, requests remaining, and expiry. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling market-data tools like getTickers or getCoinById.

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?

It explicitly names trigger phrases ('what plan am I on', 'how many requests are left', 'is my API key valid') and states the paid-key precondition and failure mode. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the tool's narrow scope makes the intended usage clear.

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

All CoinPaprika toolsInspect
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