Skip to main content
Glama

whale-insights

by com.cryptowhaleinsights

funding_rates_history

Funding rates history (daily snapshots) — Returns the daily historical perpetual futures funding rate for a single token over the last N days (default 30, max 180). Rates are sourced from Gate.io, MEXC, and Kraken, recorded once per day from the live 5-min funding-rate cycle. Top 10 tokens by volume are snapshotted: BTC, ETH, SOL, BNB, XRP, DOGE, ADA, AVAX, LINK, DOT. Each day includes per-exchange rates (gateio/mexc/kraken) plus a derived avg and sentiment label. Sentiment: avg > 0.05% = bearish (leveraged longs paying shorts → market top signal); avg < -0.01% = bullish (shorts paying longs → market bottom signal); otherwise neutral. Use ?symbol=BTC&days=30 (symbol defaults to BTC; days is 1–180). Cold-start days with no data are omitted. Cached 5min.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoNumber of recent days to return (1–180, default 30).
symbolNoToken symbol to look up (BTC, ETH, SOL, BNB, XRP, DOGE, ADA, AVAX, LINK, DOT). Case-insensitive. Defaults to BTC.BTC

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses data sources, snapshot frequency, cold-start omission, caching, and sentiment interpretation. It covers behavioral traits thoroughly.

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 detailed but well-structured with front-loaded purpose. Slightly verbose but each sentence adds value. Minor redundancy in sentiment explanation could be trimmed.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description thoroughly explains return fields (per-exchange rates, avg, sentiment label) and their interpretation, plus caching and omission details. Complete for agent use.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description contradicts the schema on max days (description says 180, schema says 90), causing confusion. It adds token list and example query but the error outweighs benefits.

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 returns daily historical perpetual futures funding rates for a single token, with specific sources, top tokens, and fields. It distinguishes from siblings like funding_rates (current) and funding_rate_monthly (monthly).

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?

Provides a concrete query example (?symbol=BTC&days=30), defaults, supported tokens, and days range. Lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives but is sufficiently clear for selection.

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

All whale-insights 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but there are a few pairs with overlapping boundaries (e.g., analysts_signals vs analysts_signals_all, whale_movements vs whale_movements_summary) that could cause minor confusion.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming is predominantly snake_case and descriptive, with minor inconsistencies in plural/singular forms (e.g., 'analysts' vs 'analyst_archive'). Overall pattern is stable.

Tool Count2/5

With 55 tools, the server is quite heavy. While the scope is broad, many tools are history/monthly variants that could be combined, making the count feel inflated beyond what is ideal for a single server.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of crypto analytics domains (analysts, arbitrage, funding, whales, sentiment, etc.). Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct token price endpoint), but overall it's a comprehensive surface.

Resources