DexPaprika

getPoolDetails

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the full current snapshot for one pool by address: its two tokens, current price, liquidity/TVL, 24h volume, and transaction counts, returned as a single pool object (not a list). Read-only and keyless. Use after search or getNetworkPools surfaces a pool, or for 'price/TVL of this pool?' or 'details for pool 0x...'. Returns live values only; for historical candles use getPoolOHLCV, and for the raw swap feed use getPoolTransactions. Params: network (required slug); pool_address (required, e.g. '0x88e6a0c2ddd26feeb64f039a2c41296fcb3f5640'); inversed (optional bool, default false, flips the token price ratio to token1/token0).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`network`	Yes	REQUIRED: Network ID from getNetworks (e.g., 'ethereum', 'solana')
`inversed`	No	OPTIONAL: Whether to invert the price ratio (default: false)
`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.
`pool_address`	Yes	REQUIRED: Pool address or identifier (e.g., '0x88e6a0c2ddd26feeb64f039a2c41296fcb3f5640')

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Description confirms read-only and keyless behavior, consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint false). It adds value by stating 'Returns live values only' and clarifying no authentication needed, beyond what annotations specify.

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?

Paragraph is well-structured with clear sections: purpose, usage, alternatives, params. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy. Front-loaded with key information.

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 4 params, sibling tools, and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: explains output shape (single pool object), live values, and when to use each sibling. Complements schema well.

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% but description omits the 'rationale' parameter (required). It explains inversed semantics with 'flips the token price ratio to token1/token0' and gives examples for network and pool_address. The missing param reduces completeness slightly, but schema covers it.

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?

Description clearly states it gets a full snapshot for one pool, lists specific data fields (tokens, price, liquidity, volume, tx counts), and clarifies it returns a single object not a list. It distinguishes from sibling tools like getPoolOHLCV and getPoolTransactions.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (after search/getNetworkPools, for price/TVL/details queries) and when not to use (for historical candles or raw swap feed), naming alternatives. This provides clear context for the AI agent to select the correct tool.

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?