Crank Protocol

get_consensus

Read-onlyIdempotent

Multi-source consensus + contrarian read for one asset (PLATINUM premium).

Cross-references the classified intelligence signals for asset over the last window_hours (default 24): how many independent sources agree on direction (consensus_score 0-1), the source breakdown (bullish/bearish/neutral), and the accuracy-weighted directional score (-1..+1) that blends each source's call by its historical hit-rate (get_source_accuracy). High agreement (>80%) is flagged as a crowded, potentially contrarian condition; low agreement (<30%) as uncertain. This is a PLATINUM-tier feature: covered by a Platinum $CRANK-staker subscription, or pay the per-call x402 fee with payment_header (PAYMENT_REQUIRED otherwise); the billing outcome is in the response billing field. Descriptive signal only, not a recommendation. Not financial advice.

Workflow: INTELLIGENCE step -- pair with get_market_briefing + get_source_accuracy to gauge how crowded a directional read is before sizing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`asset`	Yes
`caller_id`	No
`window_hours`	No
`payment_header`	No
`wallet_address`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint true and destructiveHint false. The description reinforces these by stating 'Descriptive signal only, not a recommendation' and 'Not financial advice.' It adds billing context and explains the consensus score range, exceeding what annotations alone provide.

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 front-loaded with the purpose in the first sentence, followed by detailed explanation and a clear workflow section. No redundant sentences; each adds value. Length is appropriate for the complexity.

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?

Given the 5-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage and no output schema details, the description provides comprehensive context: premium tier, billing, consensus scoring ranges, source breakdown, and workflow pairing. It is fully complete for an agent to understand usage.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the burden. It effectively explains 'asset', 'window_hours' (with default 24), and mentions 'payment_header' for billing. However, 'caller_id' and 'wallet_address' are not explained, leaving some ambiguity. Still, the main parameters are well-covered.

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 first sentence clearly states the verb 'get', the resource 'multi-source consensus + contrarian read for one asset', and distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'PLATINUM premium' and the 'INTELLIGENCE step' workflow context. It is specific and unique.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance: 'Workflow: INTELLIGENCE step -- pair with get_market_briefing + get_source_accuracy to gauge how crowded a directional read is before sizing.' It also explains premium tier and payment process, telling the agent when this tool is appropriate.

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

All Crank Protocol tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools overlap significantly: close_perp_position vs perp_close, get_leaderboard vs get_score_leaderboard vs get_strategy_leaderboard, get_venue_status vs get_all_venues_status, send_token_social vs bulk_send_social, and get_crank_score vs get_score. Several read-only tools have nearly identical purposes, and the descriptions do not always clarify boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (get_balances, create_strategy, set_alert, list_webhooks). However, there are deviations like 'lst_swap', 'jupiter_swap', 'flash_loan', 'sr_backtest', and the use of both 'get_' and 'list_' for reads, plus category prefixes like 'perp_' and 'strategy_' that vary in order. Overall still readable and predictable.

Tool Count1/5

177 tools is an extreme count for any server, far exceeding the 25+ threshold for 'too many'. Even a full DeFi platform does not need this many separate operations; the surface is overwhelming and clearly not well-scoped.

Completeness3/5

The domain (Solana DeFi trading) is covered extensively across swaps, perps, lending, staking, strategies, signals, and support. However, there are notable gaps: no lend_withdraw, no direct way to close a lending position, no spot order cancellation (though aggregator-based swaps may not need it), and a general lack of tiered account management. The huge number of tools makes it hard to identify missing lifecycle steps.

Resources

Need Help?