Skip to main content
Glama

Onvexia — Crypto Fundamentals, Sentiment & Onchain Tracking

by com.onvexia
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Fundamentals · Technical levels

get_asset_technicals
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get support and resistance merged across 1w/1d/4h/1h, per-timeframe indicators, and derived spot/long/short setups for an asset.

    Each level carries the timeframes that confirmed it and the method on
    each — a level agreed by four charts is a different claim from one seen
    on the hourly. `measured_against` names the exchange and pair every
    distance was computed from, and `price_age_minutes` says how old that
    price is.

    Setups are GEOMETRY, not forecasts: an entry is a level cluster, a stop
    is that level offset by a measured multiple of daily range, and
    `rr_ratio` is computed from those prices. `status` is derived per
    request — pending, in_zone or passed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
symbolYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive hints. The description goes further by explaining that setups are geometric constructs, not forecasts; that levels carry confirmation timeframes and methods; and that status is derived per request. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the structured 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?

The description is front-loaded with the core output, followed by concise clarifications of meaningful nuances. Each sentence adds value, though a small amount of redundancy exists across the setup explanation and status line. Overall, it remains appropriately compact.

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 does a good job explaining the main returned concepts: merged levels, confirmation timeframes, measured_against, price_age_minutes, setup geometry, and status. It stops short of explaining parameter semantics or result format, but the core usage context is sufficiently complete for a read-only analysis tool.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not explain either parameter. The term 'asset' loosely implies the symbol parameter, and 'limit' is not mentioned at all. The description provides no guidance on how limit affects results or what format symbol should take.

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 names a specific verb ('Get') and a precise resource: support/resistance levels merged across four timeframes, per-timeframe indicators, and derived setups. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_asset_fundamentals and get_ohlcv without requiring the schema.

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 intended use case is implied by the content (technical levels and setups), but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. An agent can infer its purpose from the resource description, but the guidance is not made explicit.

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

All Onvexia — Crypto Fundamentals, Sentiment & Onchain Tracking toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources