intel

btc_mempool_history

Requires a ChainHelix API key as bearer token, or 2 cents per call paid over Binance b402 in USDT, USDC, USD1 or U on BNB Smart Chain, or over x402 in USDC on the Base network. Bitcoin mempool over a window: fastest fee, transaction count and size as a sampled series with the window high, low and latest. window in hours, default 24, max 168

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`window`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`meta`	No
`feeLow`	No
`latest`	No
`series`	No
`source`	No
`feeHigh`	No
`receipt`	No
`samples`	No
`windowHours`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 21, 2026

changedInput schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256

Previous value: -"a1c2e10fd3177d6b4d59ca78693e8fb36880165cf0f735f680dd86a510411178"New value: +"e5b4290024a229f2bdf97f8fc6a0079c3fe13b77267f41fdcffeb8b26aa1c41e"

Changed1 schema field changedSep 19, 2026

changedInput schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256

Previous value: -"1eeb782ee15fe69fc80776948e0556fa6b795e210e6305935b2c97b73d955cda"New value: +"a1c2e10fd3177d6b4d59ca78693e8fb36880165cf0f735f680dd86a510411178"

Changed1 schema field changedSep 19, 2026

changedInput schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256

Previous value: -"c014292cad7497ce9fd68c33345ac32cb42b672c8e77d6c749c26e162cc207e4"New value: +"1eeb782ee15fe69fc80776948e0556fa6b795e210e6305935b2c97b73d955cda"

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 19, 2026

addedInput schema / x-lexicon

Added value: +{
+  "bundleSha256": "c014292cad7497ce9fd68c33345ac32cb42b672c8e77d6c749c26e162cc207e4",
+  "name": "ChainHelix Agentic Lexicon",
+  "resolve": "lexicon_resolve",
+  "spec": "lexicon_spec",
+  "version": "0.1.0"
+}

addedInput schema / x-vocab

Added value: +{
+  "window": "market.window"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 7, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / source
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
```

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 5, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / meta

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "contentHash": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "generated": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "priceUsd": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "validUntil": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / receipt

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "bytes": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "covers": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "issuedAt": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "lookup": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "network": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "nonce": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "seq": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "settleTx": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "sha256": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedAug 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose important context: API key or per-call payment is required, and the data is a sampled series with window summary values. It does not mention units, sampling interval, or error behavior, but it provides meaningful behavioral context beyond the bare schema.

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 description is two sentences and each carries necessary information: the auth/payment prerequisite and the data semantics. The payment sentence is somewhat long and front-loaded before the core purpose, but it is not wasteful and the overall length is appropriate.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given one optional parameter, no annotations, and an output schema present, the description covers the key operational facts: authentication/cost, window semantics, and returned data shape in prose. Minor ambiguities like exact units of 'size' and 'fastest fee' remain, but the output schema likely resolves return details.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must clarify the parameter, and it does: window is in hours, defaults to 24, and maxes at 168. This adds units, default, and bound, which is exactly the meaning an agent needs beyond the bare 'number' type.

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 identifies the resource (Bitcoin mempool over a window) and the specific metrics it provides: fastest fee, transaction count, size, and window high/low/latest. It is clear despite being phrased as a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb+resource statement. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools, but the mempool/history scope is sufficiently unique.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gas_state, congestion, or market_state. The description states window defaults and limits, but not the appropriate conditions or exclusions that would help an agent decide between this and sibling tools.

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

All intel 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.

Resources

Need Help?