Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Agent Einstein — Crypto & Market Intelligence

by io.emc2ai
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

YouTube Video Analysis

analyze_youtube_video
Read-onlyIdempotent

Analyse one YouTube video from its link: a summary, timestamped key points, every explicit market call (ticker, direction, conviction, horizon, quote, timestamp) with the current spot price, sponsor mentions, and the channel's graded record when Einstein follows it. length sets how much is read: 'standard' the first 15 minutes, 'long' up to 1 hour, 'full' up to 3 hours; a tier longer than the video needs, or an unreadable video, is refused and not charged. [Paid: $0.05–$0.60 per call from your Einstein credit balance. Free alternatives exist for several of these — see list_einstein_capabilities.]

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesYouTube video link (youtube.com/watch?v=…, youtu.be/…, /shorts/…, /live/…).
lengthNoHow much of the video to read: 'standard' (first 15 min, default), 'long' (up to 1 h), 'full' (up to 3 h).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
skillNoWhich Einstein capability answered. These tools route onto one of many skills by an enum argument, so this names the branch that actually ran.
reasonNoWhy there is no analysis, when `available` is false.
analysisNoThe written answer, identical to the result's text block. This is the field to read: the rest of the payload is whichever capability answered, and its shape varies by tool and by argument.
availableNoTrue when the analysis ran. False when it did not — no capability matched the arguments, the caller is out of credit, billing was unavailable, or the skill produced nothing. NOT a statement about the market.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / length
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "How much of the video to read: 'standard' (first 15 min, default), 'long' (up to 1 h), 'full' (up to 3 h).",
+  "enum": [
+    "standard",
+    "long",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations by disclosing pricing ($0.05–$0.60 per call, billed to the Einstein credit balance) and a no-charge guarantee when the tier exceeds the video length or the video is unreadable. This cost and refusal behavior is exactly the context annotations cannot convey.

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 output inventory is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by length semantics and then cost/refusal terms. It's dense but each element earns its place; the single long opening sentence is the only minor readability cost.

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 needn't be re-explained, yet the description still sketches what comes back and covers cost, tier validation, and refund behavior. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented; the description's restatement of the length tiers largely duplicates the enum descriptions. It adds a small amount — clarifying that a too-long tier is refused rather than truncated — but stays at the baseline for fully documented parameters.

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?

States a specific verb ('Analyse') and resource ('one YouTube video from its link') and enumerates the concrete outputs: summary, timestamped key points, market calls with ticker/direction/conviction/horizon, sponsor mentions, and graded channel record. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like analyze_bitcoin or ask_einstein.

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?

Frames usage around a single video link and points to a concrete alternative path — 'Free alternatives exist for several of these — see list_einstein_capabilities' — routing cost-sensitive callers elsewhere. It doesn't give explicit when-not-to-use conditions beyond the length-tier refusal rule, so not quite a 5.

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

All Agent Einstein — Crypto & Market Intelligence 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