arena_list_onchain_seriesWhich on-chain series are available? Lists all 69 available Bitcoin Research Kit (BRK) on-chain series across the groups pilot, sentiment, mining, supply, cointime, activity, liquidity (e.g. MVRV, NUPL, SOPR, Realized-Price, Mayer, Puell, STH/LTH SOPR, Hash-Ribbons). Returns id + label + group. Use the id with arena_get_onchain_latest / _history. [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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden, and it does reasonably well: it discloses the cardinality (69 series), the grouping taxonomy, the exact return shape (id + label + group), and the pricing tier ([Free tier]). It does not state whether the list is static or updates over time, which is a minor gap for a no-parameter read tool.
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?
Front-loaded with the core question and answer, followed by tier and return shape in compact sentences. The parenthetical example list (MVRV, NUPL, SOPR, ...) is long but earns its place by letting the agent recognize series names without a second call.
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?
For a parameterless catalog with no output schema, the description supplies everything needed: what is returned (id, label, group), how many items, the group taxonomy, and the follow-up tools. Nothing required for correct invocation is missing.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, which sets the baseline at 4. The description correctly implies no filtering is possible and instead points to the consumer tools that accept the returned ids.
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?
Opens with a direct question that names the resource ('on-chain series'), then states it lists all 69 BRK on-chain series with the enumeration groups. An agent can immediately distinguish this catalog tool from arena_get_onchain_latest / _history, which consume the ids this tool returns.
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?
Explicitly routes the agent downstream: 'Use the id with arena_get_onchain_latest / _history.' That tells the agent this is the entry point before fetching data, but it does not say when NOT to use it or contrast against other list_* siblings (list_strategies, list_universes, list_backtests).
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.