Skip to main content
Glama

cryptopulse

CryptoPulse: Global cryptocurrency intelligence API. 10 endpoints: DeFi yield farming across Ethereum/Base/Arbitrum/Solana (DeFiLlama live TVL + APY), personalized strategy builder, crypto security framework (with

Coverage: Global

Endpoints: • strategy ($0.20): Build a personalized DeFi strategy for goals and risk • security ($0.10): Scan token/address risk and harden self-custody setup • threats ($0.10): Report current crypto threats and active scam patterns • exchange ($0.10): Compare crypto exchanges on fees, custody, jurisdiction • tax ($0.20): Explain crypto tax treatment for a given jurisdiction • onboard ($0.10): Guide a first-time crypto buyer from zero to first hold • spend ($0.10): Find where to spend crypto and how to pay with it • banking ($0.10): Find crypto-friendly banks and fiat on/off ramps • merchant ($0.10): Set up crypto payment acceptance for a merchant • options-greeks ($0.02): Options pricing + greeks calculator (Black-Scholes / Black-76) — deterministic • funding-check ($0.02): Perp funding-rate check (Hyperliquid, cross-venue normalized) — deterministic • funding-arb-scan ($0.05): Cross-venue funding-arbitrage scan — deterministic • volatility-check ($0.02): Perp volatility check (realized vol, NATR, Bollinger) — deterministic • funding-history ($0.05): Perp funding-rate history — lookahead-safe, deterministic • dydx-history ($0.02): dYdX v4 chain-state history — block-stamped OI + funding index • research-brief ($0.50): Deliver an institutional crypto brief: spot, derivs, flows • equity-marks ($0.03): 24/7 stock, commodity, FX and index marks (Hyperliquid HIP-3) — deterministic • hip3-markets ($0.02): Hyperliquid HIP-3 dex + market catalog, enumerated live — deterministic • event-odds ($0.03): Real-money event odds from Hyperliquid HIP-4 outcome markets — deterministic • mark-quality ($0.03): Trust score for Hyperliquid HIP-3 perp marks (oracle divergence × liquidity) — deterministic • lending-rates ($0.03): Hyperliquid native borrow-lend market rates — deterministic • staking-intel ($0.03): Hyperliquid HYPE staking + validator intelligence — deterministic • whale-positions ($0.03): Full perp positions for any Hyperliquid wallet — deterministic • equity-positioning ($0.03): Stock-perp positioning: funding + open interest crowding (Hyperliquid HIP-3) — deterministic • research-snapshot ($0.25): Deterministic data-only crypto snapshot (price/market-structure/sentiment) — $0.25 preview of research-brief

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoAnnualized dividend/borrow yield (Black-Scholes only)
rNoAnnualized risk-free rate (decimal)
tNoYears to expiry (alternative to expiry)
ivNoAnnualized vol, decimal or percent (0.62 or 62) — provide iv OR price
endNoISO date anchoring the window end (default now)
topNotop markets per dex by open interest (max 25)
coinNoPerp symbol (BTC, ETH, SOL...) — omit for top markets by open interest
daysNoWindow length in days (max 90 per call)
goalNogoal parameter
langNoResponse language code
riskNorisk parameter
sortNoLeaderboard order (default crowding = |annualized funding|)
spotNoSpot price — Black-Scholes mode (provide spot OR forward)
typeNoOption type
chainNochain parameter
focusNoLens to emphasize
groupNoasset-class filter
limitNoWhen coin omitted: number of markets (max 50)
priceNoOption price to solve implied vol from
setupNoCurrent custody setup description
tokenNoOptional token contract address to risk-scan via GoPlus (honeypot, buy/sell tax, mint/rug traps)
actionYesWhich endpoint to call. Options: strategy | security | threats | exchange | tax | onboard | spend | banking | merchant | options-greeks | funding-check | funding-arb-scan | volatility-check | funding-history | dydx-history | research-brief | equity-marks | hip3-markets | event-odds | mark-quality | lending-rates | staking-intel | whale-positions | equity-positioning | research-snapshot
assetsNoComma-separated focus assets
expiryNoISO expiry date (08:00 UTC assumed) — or pass t
strikeNoStrike price
symbolNoone symbol (TSLA, GOLD, JPY, US500, SPCX) — omit for top markets by open interest
tickerNodYdX market ticker, e.g. BTC-USD
addressNoOptional wallet address to screen via GoPlus (sanctions, phishing, mixer, malicious activity)
capitalNoCapital in USD
countryNocountry parameter
forwardNoForward/futures price — Black-76 mode
horizonNoAnalysis horizon
profileNoprofile parameter
categoryNoThreat category: phishing, drainer, sim_swap, rug_pull, flash_loan, or all
intervalNoCandle interval
lookbackNoCandles in the window (50-500)
priorityNopriority parameter
tax_yearNoTax year e.g. 2026. Defaults to current year.
use_caseNouse_case parameter
timeframeNoInvestment timeframe in days
activitiesNoComma-separated: hold, trade, defi, mining, staking, nft, business
experienceNoexperience parameter
min_oi_usdNoMinimum Hyperliquid open interest (USD) to include a coin
value_tierNoApproximate holdings value tier used to calibrate custody recommendations
active_onlyNotrue to exclude inactive validators
integrationNointegration parameter
business_typeNobusiness_type parameter

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses useful behavioral traits: many endpoints are marked 'deterministic', one is 'lookahead-safe', and DeFi data is 'live TVL + APY'. It also lists per-call prices. Yet with no annotations, it omits return format, error handling, rate limits, and authentication. Additionally, the sentence 'crypto security framework (with' is cut off, which harms transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the overall purpose and uses bulleted endpoints for scannability, but it is overly long (25 bullets) and includes redundant phrasing like '— deterministic' repeated many times. The truncated 'with' at the end and inconsistent '10 endpoints' vs 25 listed indicate sloppy editing.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 25 endpoints, 47 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the one-line endpoint descriptions are insufficient. The description does not map which parameters apply to which actions, does not describe typical response shapes, and lacks examples or workflow guidance. This is a significant gap for such a complex tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains each of 47 parameters. The description itself adds no param-level meaning beyond the endpoint list, which is sufficient for the baseline but not more. Generic parameter descriptions like 'chain parameter' are weak, but that is a schema issue, not description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool is a 'Global cryptocurrency intelligence API' and enumerates 25 distinct endpoints with brief descriptions, making it clear what the tool does. However, it opens with '10 endpoints' then lists 25, creating confusion about scope; the contradiction lowers the score from 5.

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?

Each endpoint is given a one-line use case (e.g., 'Build a personalized DeFi strategy', 'Scan token/address risk'), so the user knows when to use each action. However, there is no guidance on when to prefer this tool over sibling tools, no mention of exclusions or prerequisites, and no alternative recommendations.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool has a unique domain prefix (e.g., airdroppulse, alphapulse, arbipulse) making them mostly distinguishable at a glance. A few adjacent verticals like careerpulse vs talentpulse or marketpulse vs dealpulse have overlapping themes, but their descriptions clarify the distinct focus. The utility tools (catalog_search, discover, get_openapi_spec, x402_troubleshoot) are also clearly distinct in role. However, the sheer number of similar 'pulse' names could still cause misselection without reading descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant naming convention is `<domain>pulse` (e.g., climatepulse, cryptopulse, edupulse), which is highly consistent and predictable. Exceptions like catalog_search, discover, get_openapi_spec, x402_troubleshoot, and stateedge break the pattern, but these are few and serve obvious utility purposes. Overall, the convention is clear and easily learnable.

Tool Count2/5

With 80 tools, the server presents an extremely large and potentially overwhelming surface. While each tool represents a distinct intelligence vertical and navigation aids exist (catalog_search, discover, get_openapi_spec), the count far exceeds the typical 3-15 range for coherent agent use and even the 'heavy' 16-25 range. The burden of selecting the correct vertical from 80 options is significant, despite clear naming.

Completeness5/5

The server offers an exceptionally broad and deep coverage of domains, from finance and health to agriculture and gaming. Each vertical includes multiple endpoints that address core operations for its domain, such as search, analysis, comparisons, deterministic checks, and even action-oriented tools like letter generators and physical mail. The presence of free discovery and troubleshooting tools fills potential gaps, leaving no obvious dead ends in the overall tool surface.