SiteCheck Web Intel

Top 50 dapps from DappRadar's public rankings page: rank

search_dappradar_rankings

Read-only

Top 50 dapps from DappRadar's public rankings page: rank, name, token symbol, chains, market cap, token price, price change, trading volume, unique active wallets (UAW) and TVL, for 24h/7d/30d, optionally for one chain (eth, solana, bnb, base, polygon, arbitrum, tron...). Values in USD as shown by DappRadar; missing values are null. Public page, no key. Price: $0.002 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": "search_dappradar_rankings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chain`	No	DappRadar chain slug, e.g. eth, solana, bnb, base, polygon, arbitrum, avalanche, tron, ton (optional, default all chains)
`limit`	No	How many dapps, 1 to 50 (default 25)
`period`	No	24h, 7d or 30d (default 24h)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain`	No
`count`	No
`dapps`	No
`period`	No
`source`	No
`checkedAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses no API key needed, per-call pricing ($0.002 USDC via x402 on Base, Solana or Arc), that failed calls are not charged, that values are USD as shown by DappRadar, and that missing values are null. These are exactly the operational details an agent needs before committing a paid call.

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 most important facts (source, returned fields) are front-loaded, followed by scoping, data semantics, and pricing in a logical order. The long field enumeration is dense but earns its place since it defines the payload; a small amount of parenthetical duplication of schema examples could be trimmed.

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 an output schema present, the description needn't explain return structure, and it still covers cost, payment mechanism, data-source caveats (USD, nulls), and filter scope. Nothing material is missing for a read-only, zero-required-parameter ranking tool.

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%, so the schema already documents chain slugs, the 1–50 limit, and period values; the description largely restates these. It adds only marginal meaning, such as the 'top 50' cap framing, without clarifying defaults or slug normalization beyond what the schema provides.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: the top 50 dapps from DappRadar's public rankings page, then enumerates the exact fields returned (rank, name, token symbol, chains, market cap, price, price change, volume, UAW, TVL). An agent can distinguish this from sibling ranking tools (FIFA, OWGR, Leiden, university rankings) at a glance.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrasing 'optionally for one chain' and the 24h/7d/30d periods, giving a sense of how to slice the data. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no routing to or away from any sibling tool, which matters given the many other ranking/news siblings.

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

All SiteCheck Web Intel 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?