Skip to main content
Glama

whale-insights

by com.cryptowhaleinsights

signal_history_monthly

Analyst signal performance permanent monthly archive — Returns the permanent monthly archive of analyst signal performance — one row per analyst per calendar month, aggregated from signal_history before months age out. Never deleted; covers all 10 CryptoWhaleInsights analysts (chain_hawk, whale_watch, alpha_scout, defi_pulse, quant_edge, rate_hawk, flow_tracer, unlock_guard, sentiment_edge, narrative_pulse). Optional ?analystId=chain_hawk to filter by a single analyst. Each row includes: month, analystId, totalSignals, winCount, lossCount, neutralCount, winRate (0–1 fraction), avgReturn (%, wins only), topSignalType, daysInMonth. Months with fewer than 5 signals are excluded. No authentication required. 60 req/min. 5-min cache.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
analystIdNoAnalyst ID to filter by (e.g. chain_hawk, whale_watch, alpha_scout, defi_pulse, quant_edge, rate_hawk, flow_tracer, unlock_guard, sentiment_edge, narrative_pulse). Omit for all analysts.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the data is never deleted, covers all 10 analysts, includes specific fields, excludes months with fewer than 5 signals, requires no authentication, has 60 req/min rate limit, and 5-min cache. This is comprehensive.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the purpose and then enumerates details. It is clear but slightly dense; could be broken into shorter sentences.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully explains the return fields (month, analystId, totalSignals, winCount, etc.). It also covers exclusion criteria, rate limit, cache, and authentication, making it complete for tool selection and invocation.

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% with parameter description already in the schema. The description adds value by providing an example value (chain_hawk) and clarifying that omitting the parameter returns all analysts.

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 a permanent monthly archive of analyst signal performance, with one row per analyst per month. It lists the specific analysts and the purpose is not a tautology.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions the tool is permanent and aggregated but does not explicitly contrast with siblings like analyst_monthly_performance or analyst_daily_summary. Usage context is implied but no when-not-to-use or alternative guidance.

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