DexPaprika

getCapabilities

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the static agent onboarding guide for this server: supported workflows, network name synonyms (mapping words like 'eth' to the canonical slug 'ethereum'), recommended call sequences, and common pitfalls. Read-only and keyless. Read it once at the start of a session before your first query, or when asked 'how do I use this API?', 'what order should I call things in?', or 'which slug maps to eth?'. This returns onboarding docs, not live market data; for the actual list of network slugs use getNetworks, and for coverage totals use getStats. Takes no parameters beyond a short rationale.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rationale`	Yes	REQUIRED. 1-2 sentence rationale for this call (e.g. "User asked for X; calling Y to fetch Z"). Logged for MCP improvement, never shown to end users. No PII or secrets. See the server `instructions` field for the full convention and worked examples.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive. Description reinforces these traits and adds specific behavioral context: 'static', 'keyless', 'returns onboarding docs not live market data'. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Description is well-structured: front-loaded purpose, followed by usage context, then distinctions. At 5 sentences, it is concise but some details could be tightened; still effective.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explains what the returned guide contains. It covers the tool's static nature, keyless access, and clear boundaries. Missing exact format details but sufficient for agent usage.

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 a detailed description for the required 'rationale' parameter. The tool description only adds 'Takes no parameters beyond a short rationale.' which adds no new semantics beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states it returns a static agent onboarding guide, listing contents (workflows, synonyms, sequences, pitfalls). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying what getNetworks and getStats do instead, making it clear this is not for live data.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit when-to-call scenarios: 'at the start of a session', or when asked specific questions. Also states what it does NOT return ('not live market data') and directs to alternatives for other needs.

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

All DexPaprika 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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose: network listings, DEX listings, pool discovery, pool snapshots, OHLCV, transactions, token details, multi-price, token pools, search, stats, and feedback. Potential overlaps like getTopTokens vs filterNetworkTokens are explicitly disambiguated in descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

Mostly follows camelCase verb-first pattern (getNetworks, getPoolDetails, getTokenMultiPrices). However, the pair filterNetworkTokens and getNetworkPoolsFilter are inconsistently structured; the latter should logically be filterNetworkPools for full consistency.

Tool Count4/5

At 17 tools, it slightly exceeds the ideal 3-15 range, but each tool covers a distinct data operation for a comprehensive DEX-market API. The count feels justified given the breadth of features, though it is on the heavier side.

Completeness4/5

The domain of read-only DEX analytics is well covered: networks, DEXes, pools, tokens, search, stats, and per-pool history. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct token price history endpoint, but pool OHLCV and token details cover most needs.

Resources

Need Help?