Agent Einstein — Crypto & Market Intelligence

Uniswap v4 Hook Radar

scan_v4_hooks

Read-onlyIdempotent

Census the Uniswap v4 hook layer on Robinhood Chain (4663), BNB Chain (56), Ethereum (1) and Base (8453): which hook contracts are creating the most pools, what each is permitted to do to a trader or an LP (take an arbitrary cut of a swap, reject a swap, block a liquidity withdrawal), which sit behind an upgradeable proxy, and which hooks no registry has catalogued. Permissions are decoded from the hook address itself, so they describe capability, not intent — most delta-taking hooks are ordinary launchpads. Robinhood Chain is one of the largest Uniswap v4 venues by volume (the share moves week to week) and a large share of its hooked liquidity is uncatalogued. [Paid: $0.25 per call from your Einstein credit balance. Free alternatives exist for several of these — see list_einstein_capabilities.]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chainId`	No	Restrict to one chain. 4663 = Robinhood Chain, 56 = BNB Chain, 1 = Ethereum, 8453 = Base. Omit for all four.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`skill`	No	Which Einstein capability answered. These tools route onto one of many skills by an enum argument, so this names the branch that actually ran.
`reason`	No	Why there is no analysis, when `available` is false.
`analysis`	No	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.
`available`	No	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.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 15, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / chainId / description

Previous value: -"Restrict to one chain. 4663 = Robinhood Chain, 8453 = Base. Omit for both."New value: +"Restrict to one chain. 4663 = Robinhood Chain, 56 = BNB Chain, 1 = Ethereum, 8453 = Base. Omit for all four."

changedInput schema / properties / chainId / enum

Previous value: -[
-  4663,
-  8453
-]New value: +[
+  4663,
+  56,
+  1,
+  8453
+]

Changed1 schema field changedSep 4, 2026

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"
+}

AddedSep 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld), so the description's job is to add context — and it does: it discloses that permissions are decoded from the hook address and therefore describe capability, not intent, and warns that most delta-taking hooks are ordinary launchpads. It also surfaces the paid nature ($0.25/call). It does not detail rate limits or provenance freshness, keeping it at 4.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and scope, then layered with interpretive caveats and pricing. Most sentences earn their place, though the parenthetical about Robinhood Chain's volume share is more promotional context than operational guidance and slightly dilutes the density.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values. It covers scope, chain coverage, the interpretive caveat around decoded permissions, cost, and where free alternatives live — everything an agent needs to decide and invoke correctly.

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?

There is one optional parameter at 100% schema description coverage, with the enum-to-chain mapping already documented in the schema. The description restates the chain IDs and the 'omit for all four' default, adding essentially no syntax or constraint detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb 'Census' plus the specific resource 'Uniswap v4 hook layer' on four named chains is unambiguous, and the description enumerates the concrete dimensions returned (top pool-creating hooks, decoded permissions, proxy upgradeability, uncatalogued hooks). An agent can distinguish this from siblings like scan_launchpads or inspect_onchain without opening a schema.

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?

It gives clear context for when the tool is relevant (hook-level analysis on those four chains) and explicitly names an alternative path for free coverage via list_einstein_capabilities. It stops short of stating explicit when-not-to-use conditions or contrasting with the nearest siblings (scan_launchpads, get_launchpad_radar), so it lands at 4 rather than 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 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.