Backtesting Arena

Get Altcoin Season Snapshot

arena_get_altcoin_season

Read-only

Is it altcoin season? Daily Altcoin-Season indicator (v7 Native-Filter methodology). Returns BTC-, alt- and stablecoin dominance, the 4 Layer-1 signals (alt_dominance, total_market_cap, btc_dominance, stable_dominance — weekly smoothed-Heikin-Ashi directions; weights in methodology.layer1), overall color (red/yellow/green) and Layer 2: altcoin_season_pct (share of top-50 alts beating BTC over 90 days) with altcoin_season_pct_basis (beating / eligible / expected — coins without a 90-day return drop out of the denominator) and altcoin_season_pct_provenance (grade full/partial/thin; fields="full" names the missing coins), plus the top-30 CoinGecko snapshot. [Free tier]

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "arena_get_altcoin_season"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`fields`	No	Omit for the default response, which carries `provenance` in short form (grade full/partial/thin, sources_used, sources_expected). 'full' adds the long form: sources_missing (named), sources (licence attribution names), grade_reason, as_of — plus per-part provenance where the composite has parts. A `thin` grade (under half the expected inputs) is never a basis for a verdict or a ranking.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 29, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 13, 2026

addedInput schema / $schema

Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedInput schema / properties / fields

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Omit for the default response, which carries `provenance` in short form (grade full/partial/thin, sources_used, sources_expected). 'full' adds the long form: sources_missing (named), sources (licence attribution names), grade_reason, as_of — plus per-part provenance where the composite has parts. A `thin` grade (under half the expected inputs) is never a basis for a verdict or a ranking.",
+  "enum": [
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 25, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / context

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\"",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "context"
-]
```

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only supply readOnlyHint, and the description adds substantial context beyond that: free-tier status, the provenance grade scale (full/partial/thin), and the denominator rule that coins without a 90-day return drop out. It does not discuss caching/freshness or rate limits, which keeps it from a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the right question, but the body is one long run-on sentence packed with parentheticals and underscored field names, which is hard to scan. Every element is technically informative, yet the structure would benefit from splitting the return-payload detail out.

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 carries the full burden and does so thoroughly, describing dominant metrics, Layer-1 signals, Layer-2 percentage with basis and provenance, and the top-30 snapshot. It stops short of describing response shape/ordering or freshness, leaving a minor gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter's enum and default are already documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description goes slightly further by explaining what 'full' adds in the response (named missing sources, licence attribution, grade_reason, as_of), reinforcing the enum's purpose.

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 question ('Is it altcoin season?'), names the concrete artifact (Daily Altcoin-Season indicator, v7 Native-Filter methodology), and enumerates what it returns. An agent can immediately distinguish this from arena_get_fear_greed or arena_get_btc_market_structure 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 Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied by the opening question — an agent infers it answers a season-rotation question, but no sibling alternative is named and no explicit 'use this when...' is given. The 'thin grade is never a basis for a verdict' line is a validity caveat rather than a routing guideline, so it does not fully satisfy this dimension.

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

All Backtesting Arena 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.