Skip to main content
Glama

DexPaprika

by com.dexpaprika.mcp

getNetworks

Read-onlyIdempotent

List every blockchain network DexPaprika indexes, each row carrying its network id (slug), 24h volume, transaction count, and pool count. Read-only and keyless. Start here (or getCapabilities) to get the exact network slug that nearly every other tool requires as its 'network' argument. Use for 'which chains do you support?', 'is Base/Solana/Arbitrum covered?', or 'what is the slug for Polygon?'. Returns the full array with no pagination or sorting; takes no parameters beyond a short rationale. For platform-wide totals rather than a per-network list use getStats.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rationaleYesREQUIRED. 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 declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond annotations: 'Read-only and keyless', 'Returns the full array with no pagination or sorting', and 'takes no parameters beyond a short rationale'. No contradiction.

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?

The description is concise at four sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence provides essential information without redundancy.

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?

Given no output schema, the description covers return structure (network id, volume, txns, pool count) and behavior (full array, no pagination). It also notes authentication status (keyless) and integration guidance. 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 the rationale parameter fully described in the schema. The description only restates that it 'takes no parameters beyond a short rationale', adding no new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with 'List every blockchain network DexPaprika indexes', providing a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by noting it returns network slugs needed by other tools and contrasts with getStats for platform-wide totals.

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?

Explicit scenarios are given: 'Start here... to get the exact network slug', 'Use for which chains...', and alternatives are mentioned (getStats). While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the guidance is clear and distinguishes usage context.

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

All DexPaprika 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

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