SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

Bitvavo last price for one market such as BTC-EUR

finance_bitvavo_tickers

Read-only

Bitvavo (Dutch exchange) last price for one market such as BTC-EUR, from Bitvavo's public ticker endpoint. Last price only. Related tools on this server, for a different need: finance_whitebit_tickers when you need WhiteBIT exchange spot ticker for one market: last price; finance_bitget_tickers when you need Bitget spot ticker for one pair: last price, bid/ask, 24h. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "market": "<market>"
    },
    "name": "finance_bitvavo_tickers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`market`	Yes	Bitvavo market, e.g. BTC-EUR, ETH-EUR

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description goes well beyond them: data comes from a public endpoint, the return is a single last price with no bid/ask/24h figures, and there is a paid-call model ($0.002 USDC per successful call via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc) with failed calls not charged. Cost, payment mechanism and failure charging are exactly the behavioral facts an agent needs before invoking.

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?

Front-loaded and well ordered: what it returns, scope limitation, alternatives, then pricing. The 'last price' phrase is repeated three times across the two sentences, which is mild redundancy, but the pricing sentence earns its space because it is non-obvious.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, nothing an agent needs is missing: venue, scope, market syntax, alternatives and the x402 cost are all stated. Return shape is covered by the output schema, so no further description is required.

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?

There is a single required parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema already giving 'Bitvavo market, e.g. BTC-EUR, ETH-EUR'. The description repeats the same example format rather than adding new rules (case sensitivity, separator, whether aliases like BTC-USD resolve), so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb+resource+venue: Bitvavo last price for one market, sourced from Bitvavo's public ticker endpoint, and narrows scope with 'Last price only.' The exchange name and market format (BTC-EUR) let an agent separate it from the many other *_tickers siblings without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly names alternatives and the condition that selects them: WhiteBIT ticker when you need WhiteBIT, Bitget ticker when you need bid/ask/24h. The implicit rule (pick this one only for Bitvavo last price) is clear, but it does not address when to prefer this over the other ~20 ticker siblings or when not to use it (e.g. needing OHLC or volume).

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?