True Value Rankings

Get Scoring Methodology

get_methodology

Read-onlyIdempotent

Free. Explains how True Value Rankings scores cryptocurrencies: the 8 metrics, their current default weights, the 4 built-in weight presets, and the general scoring approach. Data from True Value Rankings (truevaluerankings.com).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	false on a normal answer, or an error message
`status`	No	Present when the request could not be answered as asked, for example not_available
`context`	No	Standing context about TVR and how to read its outputs
`summary`	No	Plain-language summary of the answer
`requested`	No	What was asked for, when it could not be resolved
`disclaimer`	No	Model-derived assessment, not investment advice
`learn_more`	No	Links for more detail
`attribution`	No	Required attribution text
`methodology`	No	The 8 metrics, their default weights and how the TVR Score is built
`data_sources`	No	Where the numbers come from

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 16, 2026

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"
+    },
+    "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"
+    },
+    "learn_more": {
+      "description": "Links for more detail"
+    },
+    "methodology": {
+      "description": "The 8 metrics, their default weights and how the TVR Score is built"
+    },
+    "requested": {
+      "description": "What was asked for, when it could not be resolved",
+      "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"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMar 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict these. It adds useful context beyond the annotations by noting the tool is 'Free' and attributing the data source to truevaluerankings.com.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the key fact ('Free'), then lists exactly what the tool explains, and ends with the data source—every element earns its place.

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?

For a no-parameter informational tool, the description fully covers the subject matter: metrics, current default weights, built-in presets, and general scoring approach. Since an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return fields.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify; the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to add parameter detail because none exists.

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 specific verb ('Explains') and clearly identifies the resource: True Value Rankings' scoring methodology. It enumerates concrete content (8 metrics, default weights, 4 weight presets, general approach), making the tool easy to distinguish from siblings that return scores or comparisons.

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 description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings like get_tvr_score or compare_coins. It implies the use case through its content, but there is no direct routing or exclusion such as 'use this when you need weights, not scores.'

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

All True Value Rankings tools Inspect

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.