Skip to main content
Glama

True Value Rankings

by com.truevaluerankings
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Top Ranked Coins

get_top_ranked
Read-onlyIdempotent

Free. Returns the top N cryptocurrencies by a chosen ranking method: tvr_score (fundamental strength), most_undervalued (largest positive fair value gap), or most_overvalued (largest negative fair value gap). Data from True Value Rankings (truevaluerankings.com).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoNumber of coins to return (default 5)
rank_byNoRanking method: tvr_score, most_undervalued, or most_overvaluedtvr_score

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNofalse on a normal answer, or an error message
statusNoPresent when the request could not be answered as asked, for example not_available
contextNoStanding context about TVR and how to read its outputs
rank_byNoThe ranking basis used
summaryNoPlain-language summary of the answer
rankingsNoOrdered list of coins
requestedNoWhat was asked for, when it could not be resolved
disclaimerNoModel-derived assessment, not investment advice
learn_moreNoLinks for more detail
attributionNoRequired attribution text
data_sourcesNoWhere the numbers come from
rank_by_descriptionNo
total_coins_evaluatedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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"
+    },
+    "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"
+    },
+    "rank_by": {
+      "description": "The ranking basis used",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "rank_by_description": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "rankings": {
+      "description": "Ordered list of coins",
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "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"
+    },
+    "total_coins_evaluated": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / count / description
      Previous value: -"Number of coins to return (1-10, default 5)"New value: +"Number of coins to return (default 5)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / count / maximum
      Previous value: -10New value: +50
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / count / description
      Previous value: -"Number of top-ranked coins to return (1-10, default 5)"New value: +"Number of coins to return (1-10, default 5)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / rank_by
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "tvr_score",
+  "description": "Ranking method: tvr_score, most_undervalued, or most_overvalued",
+  "enum": [
+    "tvr_score",
+    "most_undervalued",
+    "most_overvalued"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description does not need to cover mutation safety. It adds useful context beyond annotations by stating the API is 'Free' and by supplying source attribution and the meaning of each ranking method, which clarifies behavior without contradicting annotations.

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 sentences with no filler: the return action is front-loaded, the ranking options are compactly listed, and the free/source details are relevant. Every sentence 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 simple read-only, two-parameter tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description covers the essential non-schema information: free access, ranking-method semantics, and data source. No meaningful missing context remains for correct invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema fully documents count and rank_by with defaults/enum values, so the baseline is already met. The description goes further by explaining what each rank_by enum means (fundamental strength, positive fair-value gap, negative fair-value gap), giving the agent semantic understanding that the schema enum alone lacks.

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 states the specific verb 'Returns' with a clear resource ('top N cryptocurrencies') and the ranking method parameter. It also distinguishes the tool from list-style siblings by emphasizing ranked selection via tvr_score/most_undervalued/most_overvalued.

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 (retrieve a ranked cryptocurrency top-N list) is clear from the description, but there is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or routing to sibling tools such as list_coins or compare_coins. Usage remains implied rather than stated as a decision rule.

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 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