Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Realtap

by io.github.CSteenkamp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

NFT collection activity analytics

get_nft_analytics
Read-onlyIdempotent

Trading analytics of one NFT collection over the last 7, 30, 90 or 365 days: sales, volume (ADA), distinct buyers and sellers per day and in total, creator royalties paid (only over sales whose royalty is recorded, with the coverage), volume by wallet size (wallets grouped by how many NFTs they bought or sold in the window) and the top traders. Sales whose buyer and seller are the same wallet are left out and counted in excluded.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "policyId": "<policyId>"
    },
    "name": "get_nft_analytics"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoWindow in days: 7, 30, 90 or 365.
policyIdYesNFT policy id: 56 hex characters. Get it from `search` or `list_nft_collections`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is handled. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: royalties are computed only over sales with a recorded royalty (with coverage reported), and same-wallet buyer/seller sales are excluded and surfaced in `excluded`. It does not mention rate limits or response shape beyond field names.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the resource and window, then lists metrics in descending importance, closing with the exclusion rule. Every clause carries information; nothing is padding.

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 no output schema, the description does the work of telling the agent what comes back: per-day and total sales/volume/buyer-seller counts, royalty coverage, wallet-size buckets, top traders, and the `excluded` counter. That is enough to decide and call correctly, though the nesting of the response is not described.

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, including the 56-hex policyId pattern and the 7/30/90/365 day window. The description restates the day options but adds no syntax, default, or unit detail beyond the schema — baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Names a specific resource (one NFT collection) and enumerates the exact metrics returned: sales, ADA volume, distinct buyers/sellers, creator royalties, volume by wallet size, top traders, and excluded self-trades. An agent can distinguish it from get_nft_floor_history or get_nft_market by the metric list, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

The intended use (activity analytics for a single collection over a fixed window) is implied by the metric list, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or pointer to the alternative tools (get_nft_market, get_nft_depth, get_nft_wallet_trades) an agent might otherwise pick. The policyId provenance hint lives in the schema, not the description.

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

All Realtap 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