Nota

Price Crosscheck

price_crosscheck

Read-only

Fetch independent USD spot prices for a symbol from CoinGecko, Coinbase, Kraken, Binance and DefiLlama (no keys), drop a source that disagrees with the rest as an outlier, report median and spread, and flag how far a reference price (e.g. RYO's) deviates from them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`symbol`	Yes	Token symbol, e.g. SOL
`reference_path`	No	Where the reference price came from
`reference_price`	No	Price to compare against, e.g. RYO deep_analysis price
`reference_fear_greed`	No	A Fear & Greed value to compare with alternative.me

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`data`	No
`tool`	Yes
`as_of`	No
`status`	Yes
`request`	No
`summary`	No
`trace_id`	No
`warnings`	No
`data_mode`	No	unknown
`availability`	No
`schema_version`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 19, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$defs": {
+    "Summary": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "headline": {
+          "default": "",
+          "title": "Headline",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "key_points": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": "Key Points",
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "title": "Summary",
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "as_of": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "As Of"
+    },
+    "availability": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "title": "Availability",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "title": "Data",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "data_mode": {
+      "default": "unknown",
+      "enum": [
+        "live",
+        "mixed",
+        "simulated",
+        "unknown"
+      ],
+      "title": "Data Mode",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "request": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "title": "Request",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "schema_version": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Schema Version"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "enum": [
+        "ok",
+        "partial",
+        "unavailable"
+      ],
+      "title": "Status",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "summary": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/Summary"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "title": "Tool",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "trace_id": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Trace Id"
+    },
+    "warnings": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "title": "Warnings",
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "tool",
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "title": "Envelope",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: it fetches from five specific sources with no API keys, performs outlier removal, and computes median/spread. This gives the agent a realistic picture of what will happen, including the fact that live external data is involved.

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 description is a single dense sentence but every clause delivers value: sources, key-free access, outlier logic, and output metrics. It is grammatically complex but not bloated; splitting it into two sentences would improve readability without adding length.

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?

The description covers the core algorithm, the data sources, the lack of API keys, and the reference-price comparison, which is sufficient for an agent to understand how to invoke the tool. The presence of an output schema relieves the description of explaining return values, but it doesn't address edge cases like source failures or missing references.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context for symbol, reference_price, and reference_path by explaining how they fit into the crosscheck, but reference_fear_greed is not mentioned at all. The description doesn't substantially compensate beyond 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?

The description names a specific action ('Fetch independent USD spot prices'), the resources (CoinGecko, Coinbase, Kraken, Binance, DefiLlama), and the analytical outputs (median, spread, deviation flag). This clearly distinguishes price_crosscheck from sibling analytical tools like liquidity_check or technicals_crosscheck.

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 description implies the tool should be used when an agent needs an independent multi-source price comparison and a reference-price deviation check, e.g. against RYO's price. However, it never explicitly states when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusion criteria or prerequisite conditions.

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

All Nota 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.