list_coinsPaginated list of coins with optional name/symbol search.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page, default 1 | |
| limit | No | Page size, default 20 | |
| search | No | Search by name or symbol |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| coins | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "properties": {
+ "coins": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Canonical coin ID (e.g. `bitcoin`)",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "marketCap": {
+ "description": "Market cap in USD",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Human-readable name (e.g. `Bitcoin`)",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "price": {
+ "description": "Current spot price in USD",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "rank": {
+ "description": "Market cap rank (1 = largest)",
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "symbol": {
+ "description": "Trading symbol (e.g. `btc`)",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "symbol",
+ "name"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "coins"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint(false). The description adds 'paginated' behavior, which is useful but does not elaborate on pagination mechanics (e.g., totals, cursor). The burden is shared with annotations, so this is adequate but not exceptional.
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?
One concise sentence (10 words) that covers the essential functionality. No wasted words, and the most critical information ('paginated list', 'optional search') is front-loaded.
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?
Complexity is low (simple list with search and pagination). Output schema exists, so return format is covered. The description covers purpose and key features but omits sorting behavior or filtering details. Still, it is largely complete for an agent.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions pagination and optional search, which adds context beyond the schema's field descriptions but does not detail parameter interaction (e.g., search overrides other filters). The schema already describes default values and constraints.
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?
The description clearly states the tool returns a 'paginated list of coins' and includes 'optional name/symbol search'. This specific verb+resource combination differentiates it from siblings like 'get_coin' (single coin) or 'top_coins' (filtered list).
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_coin' or 'top_coins'. The context is implied (general listing vs. specific queries), but the description does not provide when-not-to-use or compare with other tools.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct aspect of cryptocurrency data: coin metadata, prices, rates (current, historical, changes), earn products, market summaries, stablecoin analysis, and symbol resolution. The detailed descriptions clearly differentiate even similar tools like get_price and get_price_by_symbol, or get_rates and list_earn_products.
All names use snake_case, but conventions vary: some are verb_noun (get_coin, list_coins, resolve_symbol), some are noun_noun (coin_history, fear_greed_index, market_summary), and some include 'by' for parameters. This mix is readable but could be more consistent.
With 21 tools, the server covers a broad domain of cryptocurrency data without being overwhelming. Each tool serves a clear purpose, and the count is appropriate for a comprehensive data API.
The tool set covers nearly all expected operations for a crypto data server: coin listing, metadata, prices, historical data, rates, yield products, market stats, top coins, stablecoin analysis, and symbol resolution. No obvious gaps are present for the stated focus on price, rate, and yield data.