Skip to main content
Glama

Agent Einstein — Crypto & Market Intelligence

Robinhood Chain Whale Prints

get_robinhood_whale_prints
Read-onlyIdempotent

Individual large DEX trades on Robinhood Chain (EVM 4663) — the tokenized equities (NVDA, SPY, HIMS) and Pons memecoin flow, each with its token, side, venue and USD value. Every print is valued through its USDG or ETH leg and cross-checked, so trades priced off a freshly-created pool (which the raw chain data reports in the hundreds of millions) are excluded rather than published. WETH/USDG FX swaps are counted separately instead of dominating the tape.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum rows to return (1-25).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoRow cap applied to every list in this payload.
printsNoThe tape and the pass that produced it.
reasonNoWhy the payload is absent, when `available` is false.
availableNoFalse when this call has no data — a snapshot that is not warm yet, a domain switched off, or an argument that was rejected. NOT an error, and NOT a statement about the market.
fetchedAtNoWhen the underlying snapshot was refreshed (epoch ms or ISO-8601). Age matters: these are cached reads, not live queries.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / fetchedAt / description
      Previous value: -"When the underlying snapshot was refreshed (epoch ms, or ISO-8601 for the Bitcoin cycle feed). Age matters: these are cached reads, not live queries."New value: +"When the underlying snapshot was refreshed (epoch ms or ISO-8601). Age matters: these are cached reads, not live queries."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "available": {
      +      "description": "False when this call has no data — a snapshot that is not warm yet, a domain switched off, or an argument that was rejected. NOT an error, and NOT a statement about the market.",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "fetchedAt": {
      +      "description": "When the underlying snapshot was refreshed (epoch ms, or ISO-8601 for the Bitcoin cycle feed). Age matters: these are cached reads, not live queries."
      +    },
      +    "limit": {
      +      "description": "Row cap applied to every list in this payload.",
      +      "type": "number"
      +    },
      +    "prints": {
      +      "additionalProperties": true,
      +      "description": "The tape and the pass that produced it.",
      +      "properties": {
      +        "available": {
      +          "description": "False when the last pass could not measure the chain."
      +        },
      +        "chain": {
      +          "description": "Chain name."
      +        },
      +        "chainId": {
      +          "description": "EVM chain id — 4663 for Robinhood Chain."
      +        },
      +        "ethSource": {
      +          "description": "Where that ETH price came from."
      +        },
      +        "ethUsd": {
      +          "description": "ETH price used to value the ETH-legged prints."
      +        },
      +        "minUsd": {
      +          "description": "USD floor a trade had to clear to be printed."
      +        },
      +        "prints": {
      +          "description": "Individual large trades.",
      +          "items": {
      +            "additionalProperties": true,
      +            "properties": {
      +              "side": {
      +                "description": "buy or sell."
      +              },
      +              "token": {
      +                "description": "Token traded."
      +              },
      +              "usd": {
      +                "description": "USD value of the print."
      +              },
      +              "venue": {
      +                "description": "Pool or venue the print hit."
      +              }
      +            }
      +          },
      +          "type": "array"
      +        },
      +        "quoteSwapUsd": {
      +          "description": "USD volume of those FX swaps."
      +        },
      +        "quoteSwaps": {
      +          "description": "WETH/USDG FX swaps, counted separately so they do not dominate the tape."
      +        },
      +        "rowsRejected": {
      +          "description": "Trades dropped as mispriced — a fresh pool reports values in the hundreds of millions, so they are excluded rather than published."
      +        },
      +        "rowsScanned": {
      +          "description": "Trades examined."
      +        },
      +        "windowMinutes": {
      +          "description": "Lookback window."
      +        }
      +      }
      +    },
      +    "reason": {
      +      "description": "Why the payload is absent, when `available` is false.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds substantive context beyond them: each print is valued via its USDG or ETH leg and cross-checked, trades priced off freshly-created pools are excluded, and WETH/USDG FX swaps are counted separately instead of dominating the tape. This tells the agent exactly why the numbers are trustworthy and what is filtered out.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource definition followed by the valuation/filtering rules. Every clause adds information; there is no filler or repetition of the title.

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?

With an output schema and full annotations present, the description carries only what structured fields can't: the instrument universe and the valuation methodology. It omits the observation window (over what period 'prints' are collected) and whether rows are ranked by USD value, which an agent would want before calling.

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?

The single parameter (limit, 1-25, default 10) is fully documented in the schema at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about the limit or about the ordering of rows, so it does not improve on the schema.

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+resource — individual large DEX trades on Robinhood Chain (EVM 4663) — and names the exact asset classes covered (NVDA/SPY/HIMS tokenized equities, Pons memecoins). The chain ID and asset scope make it immediately separable from siblings like get_hyperliquid_whales, get_polymarket_whales and track_whales.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer you call this when you want whale flow on Robinhood Chain, but the description never says when to choose it over track_whales or get_hyperliquid_whales, nor any precondition. The data-quality exclusions describe output composition, not when-to-use.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.