CoinPaprika

submitFeedback

Report a problem or gap back to the CoinPaprika MCP maintainers: call it when you got stuck, a response was unexpected, information you needed was missing, or a tool did not behave as documented. Use when the user says 'this is wrong', 'report this', 'that did not work'. Low friction, partial feedback is welcome, and every submission is read.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`goal`	Yes	REQUIRED: What you (or the user behind you) were trying to accomplish.
`expected`	No	OPTIONAL: What you expected to happen.
`observed`	No	OPTIONAL: What actually happened.
`severity`	No	OPTIONAL: How badly this affected your task. Default 'minor'.	minor
`blocked_at`	No	OPTIONAL: Tool name or step where you got stuck.
`attempted_tools`	No	OPTIONAL: List of tool names you called, in order, before submitting this feedback.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds context beyond annotations: 'Low friction, partial feedback is welcome, and every submission is read.' This informs the agent about expected behavior (non-destructive, human review) without contradicting the all-false annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidelines, then behavioral note. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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?

Simple feedback tool with 6 parameters well-documented in schema. Description provides usage context and behavioral traits. No output schema needed; complete for the tool's purpose.

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 coverage is 100% with good parameter descriptions. Description adds little over schema, only encouraging partial feedback. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema carries the load.

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?

Description clearly states 'Report a problem or gap' and specifies the resource (CoinPaprika MCP maintainers). It distinguishes from sibling tools which are all data retrieval or utility; no other tool serves a feedback function.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: 'call it when you got stuck, a response was unexpected...' and gives user cues like 'this is wrong'. No exclusions or alternatives needed since no sibling tool does feedback.

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?