Skip to main content
Glama

Agent Einstein — Crypto & Market Intelligence

Market Scan

scan_market
Read-onlyIdempotent

Live market scans: top gainers, biggest movers, alpha-ranked gainers with quality filters, the altcoin-season reading, technical analysis for one asset, or the current market-regime classification. [Paid: $0.25–$0.60 per call from your Einstein credit balance. Free alternatives exist for several of these — see list_einstein_capabilities.]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNotop_gainers · movers · alpha_ranked (quality-filtered gainers) · altseason · technicals (needs `token`) · regime (market regime classification).top_gainers
chainNoBlockchain network.base
limitNoMaximum results (1-100).
tokenNoToken symbol or address, for `technicals`.
timeframeNoLookback window.24h

Output Schema

TableJSON 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
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "analysis": {
      +      "description": "The 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.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "available": {
      +      "description": "True 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.",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "reason": {
      +      "description": "Why there is no analysis, when `available` is false.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "skill": {
      +      "description": "Which Einstein capability answered. These tools route onto one of many skills by an enum argument, so this names the branch that actually ran.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the read-only/unmutating profile is established. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: live data, a per-call cost from the Einstein credit balance, and the existence of free alternatives.

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?

One compact sentence front-loads the tool's purpose and then lists the variants, with a parenthetical cost note appended. No wasted words and the structure is scannable.

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?

Between the annotated safety profile, the 100%-covered schema, and the output schema, the description covers what the tool does, its cost, and that free alternatives exist. It does not explain default chain/limit behavior, but those are in the schema, so nothing essential is missing for selecting and invoking it.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description does not meaningfully expand on parameters—it merely restates scan kinds that match the kind enum, with the technicals requirement already covered in the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Live market scans') and enumerates six distinct scan kinds, making the tool's scope concrete. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from overlapping siblings like get_top_movers or get_market_sentiment, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

It states the tool is paid and points to free alternatives via list_einstein_capabilities, giving a cost-based reason to choose an alternative. However, it doesn't specify which alternative applies to which scan kind or provide conditional usage rules, so guidance remains incomplete.

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.