SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

Staked alpha trajectory and net flow into a specific

crypto_tao_subnet_stake_flows

Read-only

Staked alpha trajectory and net flow into a specific Bittensor subnet over historical pool snapshots: net flow in alpha (with its TAO value at the newest point's price), direction (inflow/outflow), and point-in-time pool stakes. Requires TAOSTATS_API_KEY. Related tools on this server, for a different need: crypto_tao_subnet_validators when you need top validators of a specific Bittensor subnet by stake; crypto_tao_subnet_concentration when you need stake and emission concentration analysis for a Bittensor. Price: $0.005 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": "crypto_tao_subnet_stake_flows"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Number of historical snapshots
`netuid`	No	Subnet network UID (default 1)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful operational context beyond them: the API-key requirement, x402 pricing at $0.005 per successful call on Base/Solana/Arc, and that failed calls are not charged. It omits rate limits or snapshot cadence, keeping it short of 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The core purpose and the sibling routing are front-loaded in the first two sentences, which is well structured. The closing pricing sentence is longer than it needs to be for tool selection, though it does carry payment-relevant information an agent must surface to a user.

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 an output schema present, the description needn't describe return values, and it still summarizes what the response contains. Prerequisite, cost model, and sibling disambiguation are all covered; only snapshot cadence or expected latency is missing for a paid external call.

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%, with defaults and bounds documented for both limit and netuid, so the baseline is 3. The description indirectly conveys that limit controls historical snapshots and netuid selects the subnet, but adds no format or edge-case guidance 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 states a precise verb-and-resource pair: staked alpha trajectory and net flow into a specific Bittensor subnet across historical pool snapshots, plus the returned metrics (net flow in alpha with its TAO value at the newest price, direction, point-in-time pool stakes). It explicitly separates itself from the two most confusable siblings by naming them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It routes the agent away from two siblings with explicit 'when you need' clauses (top validators by stake; stake/emission concentration), which implies this tool is the one for flows/trajectory. It also states the prerequisite TAOSTATS_API_KEY and the payment path, but never spells out a direct 'use this when you want net inflow/outflow history' clause.

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

All SiteCheck Crypto & Finance 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.

Resources

Need Help?