Gate Info MCP

info_platformmetrics_get_bridge_metrics

Read-onlyIdempotent

Bridge ranking or one-bridge chain breakdown. Cross-sector dashboard across DeFi, spot, perp, stablecoin, or bridge→get_defi_overview. Read-only public research data. No account access, no order placement or fund transfers. Not investment advice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chain`	No	Chain; normalized e.g. eth→Ethereum; filters chain_breakdown.
`limit`	No	Rows; default 10, max 400.
`sort_by`	No	volume_24h (default)\|volume_7d\|deposit_txs_24h.
`bridge_name`	No	Bridge name (ASCII case-insensitive after trim/space normalize); omit for ranked list without chain_breakdown.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain`	Yes
`count`	Yes
`items`	Yes
`limit`	Yes
`total`	Yes
`sort_by`	Yes
`bridge_name`	Yes
`duration_ms`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedAug 27, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- addedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / items / items / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +true
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / items / type
```
Previous value: -"array"New value: +[
+  "null",
+  "array"
+]
```

Changed1 schema field changedApr 21, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / bridge_name / description

Previous value: -"Bridge name; omit for ranked list without chain_breakdown."New value: +"Bridge name (ASCII case-insensitive after trim/space normalize); omit for ranked list without chain_breakdown."

First observedApr 16, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark it read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only public research data' and 'No account access, no order placement or fund transfers.' It also adds a useful 'Not investment advice' caveat. No contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is short and front-loaded with the core purpose, but the sentence 'Cross-sector dashboard across DeFi, spot, perp, stablecoin, or bridge→get_defi_overview' is grammatically awkward and may confuse readers. The safety caveats are concise but partly redundant with annotations.

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?

The output schema exists, so the description need not describe return values. It provides enough context about the tool's purpose, scope, and alternative dashboard tool, making it adequate for a simple read-only metrics endpoint.

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 coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for chain, limit, sort_by, and bridge_name, so the description does not need to add parameter detail. The description's mention of 'chain breakdown' aligns with the chain parameter but adds little beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific purpose: 'Bridge ranking or one-bridge chain breakdown,' which clearly identifies the resource and distinguishes it from the broader DeFi/spot/perp/stablecoin dashboard tools. The phrase 'bridge→get_defi_overview' is a bit confusing but does not obscure the main purpose.

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?

The description implies use for bridge metrics and points toward get_defi_overview for a cross-sector dashboard, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over sibling bridge/chain metrics tools. Guidance is largely implicit and somewhat awkwardly worded.

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

All Gate Info MCP 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.