Skip to main content
Glama

Get Full Breakdown

get_full_breakdown
Read-onlyIdempotent

Free. Returns all 8 metric scores with their weights, the TVR Score, rank, valuation category and a note on how the score is built for a cryptocurrency. The written scoring factors, the valuation note and the exact Fair Value Gap and TVR Estimated Value are in get_fair_value_verdict ($0.02). Accepts a ticker or a name. Data from True Value Rankings (truevaluerankings.com).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "coin": "<coin>"
    },
    "name": "get_full_breakdown"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
coinYesCryptocurrency ticker or name (e.g., BTC, Bitcoin, ETH, LTC, XMR, SOL, ADA, AVAX, DOT, POL, LINK)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
coinNoCoin name
rankNoRank among evaluated coins, 1 is best
as_ofNoWhen the prices behind this answer were taken (prices_as_of) and the day the coin's eight metric scores last changed (scores_last_changed)
errorNofalse on a normal answer, or an error message
statusNoPresent when the request could not be answered as asked, for example not_available
symbolNoTicker
contextNoStanding context about TVR and how to read its outputs
summaryNoPlain-language summary of the answer
trimmedNoPresent when this free answer leaves out the exact figures and written reasons, with where to find them
categoryNoTVR coin category
requestedNoWhat was asked for, when it could not be resolved
tvr_scoreNoTVR Score, 0 to 100
valuationNoUndervalued, Fair Value or Overvalued
disclaimerNoModel-derived assessment, not investment advice
learn_moreNoLinks for more detail
attributionNoRequired attribution text
paid_optionNoWhere relevant: the paid TVR capability that goes further than this free answer, with its price, how to pay, the licence and an example call. Nothing is charged unless the client pays.
rank_out_ofNoNumber of coins evaluated
data_sourcesNoWhere the numbers come from
paid_verdictNoThe paid fair value verdict for a coin: the exact Fair Value Gap and TVR Estimated Value with the main reasons and caveats, its price and how to call it. Nothing is charged unless the client pays.
metric_scoresNo
fair_value_gapNoGap between TVR Estimated Value and market price, formatted as a percentage
valuation_noteNo
valuation_ruleNoThe published valuation rule: Undervalued at least 4% above the market price, Overvalued more than 15% below it, Fair Value between
ranking_contextNo
scoring_factorsNoThe reasoning behind each metric score
tvr_estimated_valueNoTVR Estimated Value, formatted in USD
scoring_methodology_noteNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / as_of
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "When the prices behind this answer were taken (prices_as_of) and the day the coin's eight metric scores last changed (scores_last_changed)"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / paid_verdict
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The paid fair value verdict for a coin: the exact Fair Value Gap and TVR Estimated Value with the main reasons and caveats, its price and how to call it. Nothing is charged unless the client pays."
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / trimmed
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Present when this free answer leaves out the exact figures and written reasons, with where to find them"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / valuation_rule
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The published valuation rule: Undervalued at least 4% above the market price, Overvalued more than 15% below it, Fair Value between",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / paid_option
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Where relevant: the paid TVR capability that goes further than this free answer, with its price, how to pay, the licence and an example call. Nothing is charged unless the client pays."
      +}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "attribution": {
      +      "description": "Required attribution text",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "category": {
      +      "description": "TVR coin category",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "coin": {
      +      "description": "Coin name",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "context": {
      +      "description": "Standing context about TVR and how to read its outputs"
      +    },
      +    "data_sources": {
      +      "description": "Where the numbers come from"
      +    },
      +    "disclaimer": {
      +      "description": "Model-derived assessment, not investment advice",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "error": {
      +      "description": "false on a normal answer, or an error message"
      +    },
      +    "fair_value_gap": {
      +      "description": "Gap between TVR Estimated Value and market price, formatted as a percentage",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "learn_more": {
      +      "description": "Links for more detail"
      +    },
      +    "metric_scores": {},
      +    "rank": {
      +      "description": "Rank among evaluated coins, 1 is best",
      +      "type": "number"
      +    },
      +    "rank_out_of": {
      +      "description": "Number of coins evaluated",
      +      "type": "number"
      +    },
      +    "ranking_context": {},
      +    "requested": {
      +      "description": "What was asked for, when it could not be resolved",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "scoring_factors": {
      +      "description": "The reasoning behind each metric score"
      +    },
      +    "scoring_methodology_note": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "status": {
      +      "description": "Present when the request could not be answered as asked, for example not_available",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "summary": {
      +      "description": "Plain-language summary of the answer",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "symbol": {
      +      "description": "Ticker",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "tvr_estimated_value": {
      +      "description": "TVR Estimated Value, formatted in USD",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "tvr_score": {
      +      "description": "TVR Score, 0 to 100",
      +      "type": "number"
      +    },
      +    "valuation": {
      +      "description": "Undervalued, Fair Value or Overvalued",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "valuation_note": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / _meta
      Removed value: -{
      -  "description": "Payment metadata (handled automatically by MPP-enabled clients)"
      -}
    • changedInput schema / properties / coin / description
      Previous value: -"Cryptocurrency ticker symbol (e.g., BTC, ETH, LTC, XMR, SOL, ADA, AVAX, DOT, POL, LINK)"New value: +"Cryptocurrency ticker or name (e.g., BTC, Bitcoin, ETH, LTC, XMR, SOL, ADA, AVAX, DOT, POL, LINK)"
  5. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the description adds cost information ('Free' versus the $0.02 sibling) and the upstream data source, which are traits annotations cannot express. It does not discuss rate limits, caching, or failure behavior for unknown tickers, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 cost qualifier is front-loaded ('Free.'), followed by the payload, the alternative, the input note, and the data source, all in four compact sentences. The closing attribution to truevaluerankings.com is borderline but defensible as provenance; nothing else is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no prose explanation, yet the description still summarizes the payload at the right level of detail. With rich annotations, a fully documented single parameter, and a clear paid-alternative pointer, an agent has everything needed to select and call this tool correctly.

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% and the single 'coin' parameter already includes ticker/name examples, so the schema carries the burden. The description's 'Accepts a ticker or a name' restates that flexibility but adds no format, casing, or ambiguity-resolution guidance.

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 uses a concrete verb ('Returns') and enumerates the exact payload: all 8 metric scores with weights, TVR Score, rank, valuation category, and a note on how the score is built. It also implicitly separates itself from get_tvr_score by promising the full bundle rather than a single score.

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?

It explicitly routes the agent to get_fair_value_verdict ($0.02) for the written scoring factors, valuation note, exact Fair Value Gap, and TVR Estimated Value, so the boundary between the two tools is clear. It stops short of stating when-not to use this tool (e.g., for historical or comparison needs covered by other siblings), so it is not a full 5.

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.