arena_get_spot_priceCurrent BTC, ETH and SOL spot price — what is Bitcoin (or ETH/SOL) worth right now? Live USDT-quoted last price plus 24h change %, high and low from Binance. Use this to anchor the connector’s own analytics (cycle, historical-analog, gem scores) with the current market price instead of switching to web search mid-analysis. [Free tier]
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / contextRemoved 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"
-}Input schema / requiredRemoved value: -[
- "context"
-]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data source (Binance), freshness ('Live'), and that it is on the free tier, implying accessibility. While it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication, or response structure, for a no-parameter read tool this is reasonable. No contradiction exists.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is three sentences with no fluff. The core purpose is stated first, followed by specific data details and a practical usage note. The '[Free tier]' tag is a useful addition without verbosity. It is well-organized and front-loaded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the simplicity of a no-param get with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what is returned (prices, change, high/low), the source, and the intended use case. It does not explicitly state that all three assets are returned simultaneously, but the wording implies it. Minor ambiguity aside, it is complete enough for an agent to call correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are zero parameters, so the schema provides no semantic detail; per the rubric, the baseline for 0 params is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters and does not attempt to, so it maintains the baseline without additional value.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description explicitly states the tool retrieves the current BTC, ETH, and SOL spot price, and specifies the exact data points: USDT-quoted last price, 24h change %, high, and low, sourced from Binance. The phrase 'what is Bitcoin (or ETH/SOL) worth right now?' makes the purpose immediately clear, and it is distinct from siblings like funding rate or fear-greed tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description directly instructs to use this tool to anchor the connector's analytics (cycle, historical-analog, gem scores) with current market price, and explicitly says 'instead of switching to web search mid-analysis.' This provides clear context and an alternative (web search), though it doesn't name specific sibling tools, which is acceptable given the large sibling list.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.