Skip to main content
Glama

WaveGuard

by io.github.gpartin

waveguard_market_data

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch live crypto market data from CoinGecko and DexScreener. No external data needed — WaveGuard pulls it for you.

Use 'coin_id' for CoinGecko (e.g. 'bitcoin', 'ethereum', 'solana'). Use 'contract_address' for DexScreener (any chain). Use 'search' to find token IDs by name/symbol.

Returns: price, volume, market cap, liquidity, price history, OHLC candles — ready to feed into waveguard_token_risk, waveguard_volume_check, or waveguard_price_manipulation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoNumber of days of history (default: 90 for price_history, 30 for ohlc).
countNoNumber of results for top_coins (default: 25).
queryNoSearch query. Required for search, dex_search.
actionYesWhat data to fetch: - token_data: full metrics for a CoinGecko coin - price_history: daily prices (for price_manipulation) - ohlc: OHLC candles (for volume_check) - top_coins: top N by market cap (training baseline) - search: find CoinGecko coin IDs - dex_token: DEX data by contract address - dex_search: search DEX pairs
coin_idNoCoinGecko coin ID (e.g. 'bitcoin', 'ethereum'). Required for token_data, price_history, ohlc.
contract_addressNoToken contract address (any chain). Required for dex_token.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that no external data is needed and identifies data sources. It provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is compact (under 100 words), front-loaded with purpose, then parameter guidance, then return values. Every sentence adds value with no waste.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (6 params, 1 required, no output schema), the description covers purpose, parameter usage, return fields, and even suggests downstream tools, making it fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaning by mapping actions to parameters (e.g., 'coin_id' for CoinGecko) and providing examples, going beyond the schema's bare descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool fetches live crypto market data from CoinGecko and DexScreener, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools which are analysis-focused, not data retrieval.

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?

Explicit guidance is given for when to use coin_id, contract_address, and search parameters. While it doesn't state when not to use this tool, the context is clear as siblings are for analysis, not data fetching.

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

All WaveGuard toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose. While tools like waveguard_scan and waveguard_scan_timeseries both detect anomalies, their descriptions clearly differentiate structured data from time-series data. Similarly, token risk, volume check, and price manipulation tools address separate aspects of token analysis, avoiding overlap.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the consistent pattern 'waveguard_<descriptive_name>' in snake_case. The names are descriptive and predictable, making it easy to infer functionality from the name alone. No mixed conventions or vague names are present.

Tool Count4/5

19 tools is on the higher side but still appropriate given the broad domain of crypto analytics, anomaly detection, and market data. Each tool serves a specific purpose, and the count is justified by the comprehensive feature set. However, a few tools could potentially be merged without loss of clarity.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of functionalities: health check, market data fetching, fingerprinting, similarity comparison, anomaly detection (structured and time-series), risk assessment (token, price manipulation, volume, wallet), counterfactuals, and interaction matrices. Some minor gaps exist, such as missing data export or visualization tools, but core workflows are well-supported.

Resources