Skip to main content
Glama

whale-insights

by com.cryptowhaleinsights

sentiment_history

Social sentiment history (daily snapshots) — Returns the daily historical social-sentiment score for a single token over the last N days (default 30, max 180). Data is sourced from CryptoWhaleInsights' own in-house Social Sentiment engine (Stocktwits + CoinGecko + price-momentum — no Twitter API). Each day is recorded once per day from the live 5-min sentiment cycle. Cold-start days with no data are omitted. Use ?symbol=BTC&days=30 (symbol is required; days is optional 1–180). Supported symbols: BTC, ETH, SOL, BNB, XRP, ADA, DOGE, AVAX, MATIC, DOT, LINK, UNI, ATOM, ARB, OP, SUI, SEI, NEAR, APT, PEPE, WIF, BONK, FET, RENDER, TAO, AAVE, MKR, LDO, INJ, TON, STX, TIA, PYTH, BLUR, MINA, and more. Score is 0–100 (≥60 bullish, ≤40 bearish). Cached 5min.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoNumber of recent days to return (1–180, default 30).
symbolYesToken symbol to look up (e.g. BTC, ETH, SOL). Case-insensitive.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Discloses data source, update frequency, cold-start omission, score interpretation, and caching. However, the description claims max 180 days while the schema says max 90, introducing a factual inconsistency that could mislead the agent. No annotations are present, so the description bears full burden.

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?

Efficient and well-structured: front-loaded with purpose, then details. Some redundancy (e.g., 'default 30, max 180' repeated), but overall each sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides good context: explains output nature (score 0-100 with thresholds), data omission, and data source. Missing explicit output format but sufficient for agent understanding.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% (baseline 3). The description adds value by listing many supported symbols, clarifying symbol is required, and restating days range. The discrepancy in max days slightly reduces reliability.

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 it 'Returns the daily historical social-sentiment score for a single token over the last N days', clearly identifying the action, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like 'sentiment_monthly' by emphasizing 'daily snapshots'.

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 an example call ('?symbol=BTC&days=30') and clearly states symbol is required and days is optional with range 1–180. However, it does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or mention when to avoid this tool.

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