Skip to main content
Glama

kr-crypto-intelligence

by io.github.bakyang2

get_global_vs_korea_divergence_deep

Read-only

Deep tier — light data + Korean news signals (Coinness Telegram, 24h window) + structured AI breakdown (drivers, global context, action suggestion, confidence). 5-min cache. Returns light response fields plus recent_news_signal (korean_news_count_24h, sentiment_score, top_keywords) and ai_deep_analysis (summary, korean_market_drivers, global_context, implied_action_suggestion, confidence).

💰 Price: $0.10 USDC per call 💳 Payment: x402 micropayment on Base, Polygon, or Solana 🔧 Client: AgentCash, Pay.sh, or any x402 SDK 📖 Docs: https://api.printmoneylab.com/.well-known/x402

Args: symbol: Crypto symbol — supported: BTC, ETH, XRP, SOL, ADA, DOGE, DOT, MATIC, LINK, AVAX, ATOM, UNI, LTC, NEAR, OP, ARB, APT, ALGO, FTM, SUI, TRX, BCH, ETC, HBAR, SHIB

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolNoCrypto symbol (e.g., BTC, ETH, XRP, SOL, ADA, DOGE, DOT, MATIC, LINK, AVAX, ATOM, UNI, LTC, NEAR, OP, ARB, APT, ALGO, FTM, SUI, TRX, BCH, ETC, HBAR, SHIB)BTC

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, and the description adds useful context: 5-min cache, 24h news window, and the returned field structure. It also discloses the per-call cost and payment method, which are behavioral traits. No contradiction with readOnlyHint.

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 front-loaded with the core 'Deep tier' purpose and then details return fields. The payment and docs lines add essential operational info, though the emojis and multi-line structure make it slightly longer than necessary.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With one parameter, a full list of supported symbols, an output description of nested fields, and payment/cache details, the description covers all necessary invocation context. The output schema further reduces the need to explain return values, so the description is complete.

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?

The schema already fully describes the single 'symbol' parameter with supported values and a default. The description repeats these supported symbols but adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clearly identifies this as the 'Deep tier' variant focused on Korean news signals and AI breakdown, distinguishing it from the base sibling get_global_vs_korea_divergence. It specifies the resource (global vs Korea divergence) and the added deep-analysis fields.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative recommendations are given. The 'Deep tier' label implies it is for deeper analysis but does not state when to choose it over the base tool or other siblings. Payment details are provided but do not guide tool selection.

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

All kr-crypto-intelligence toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have distinct purposes (prices, alerts, news, health), but several overlap: get_kimchi_premium vs get_arbitrage_scanner both cover premium data, and get_kr_sentiment, get_market_read, and get_global_vs_korea_divergence_deep all provide AI analysis with different scopes, which could confuse an agent.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent get_<descriptive_noun> pattern in snake_case, with check_health as the only deviation, which is a conventional health-check exception. The naming is highly predictable.

Tool Count3/5

With 17 tools, the server is on the heavy side per the calibration (16-25 feels heavy). While the domain is broad and each tool has a role, the existence of paired summary/deep variants adds redundancy that could be consolidated.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a comprehensive Korean crypto intelligence surface: prices, premiums, arbitrage, alerts, sentiment, market analysis, FX, news, and health. Minor gaps like a general Korean crypto news tool or historical data are not critical but prevent a perfect score.

Resources