CoinPaprika

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

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rationale`	Yes	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.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description adds useful context: it explains the tool is read-only (consistent with annotations), requires a user's own key, and returns a plan-required message if missing. However, it falsely claims 'takes no parameters' when the input schema requires a 'rationale' parameter. This inaccuracy reduces transparency.

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 concise (5 sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. It avoids fluff, but the misleading statement about parameters detracts from overall structure.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately covers return values (plan, quota, requests remaining, expiry) and the missing-key behavior. However, it omits the rationale parameter entirely and does not mention error handling beyond the missing-key case.

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 covers the rationale parameter 100%, but the description does not add meaning—it incorrectly states there are no parameters. This misleads the agent about the tool's interface, so the description fails to enhance understanding.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get details and usage for the CoinPaprika API key you supplied: plan, quota, requests remaining and expiry.' It uses specific verbs and resource, and this tool is distinct from the many siblings focused on coins, exchanges, and other data.

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 concrete usage examples ('what plan am I on', 'how many requests are left', 'is my API key valid') and states the prerequisite of supplying a paid-plan key. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context makes it clear this is for key-only queries.

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

All CoinPaprika tools Inspect

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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes (e.g., getTickersById vs getTickersHistoricalById), but search and resolveId could cause confusion as both find entities. Overall, overlaps are minimal and well-documented.

Naming Consistency4/5

Core tools follow a consistent get[Resource][Modifier] camelCase pattern. Some utility tools (priceConverter, resolveId, search, keyInfo, submitFeedback, status) break the pattern, but they are clearly separate and the naming is still readable.

Tool Count3/5

With 31 tools, the server is comprehensive but slightly heavy. Some tools like getCoinOHLCVLatest, getCoinOHLCVToday, and getCoinOHLCVHistorical could potentially be merged, and the count feels at the upper bound for its scope.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers a wide range of crypto data needs: current/historical prices, OHLC, exchanges, contracts, tags, people, global stats, search/resolution, and administrative functions. Only advanced features like news or portfolio tracking are missing.

Resources

Need Help?