Skip to main content
Glama

HSH Data-on-Demand

by io.github.hshintelligence

hsh-crypto-intel

Complete crypto intel for trading agents. Three layers in one call: (1) cross-exchange POSITIONING — Binance + Bybit funding, open interest, price fused into a signal (overheated-long/short, cross-exchange dislocation); (2) ON-CHAIN whale activity — large confirmed BTC transactions from the latest block; (3) LIQUIDATION RISK — a derived forward-looking cascade-risk score from funding + OI + price. Pay per call via x402 (USDC on Base). Supported assets: BTC, ETH, SOL, BNB, XRP, DOGE.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assetNoAsset ticker e.g. BTC, ETH, SOL (default BTC).
symbolNoOptional explicit perp symbol e.g. BTCUSDT.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses payment via x402 and the three layers, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, data freshness, or error handling. It does not contradict any 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 three sentences, front-loads the purpose, then lists layers, payment, and supported assets. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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?

Given the complexity of returning three layers of intelligence and no output schema, the description covers the high-level functionality well. It could benefit from mentioning the output format, but the provided details are sufficient for initial tool selection.

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%, providing baseline of 3. The description adds value by enumerating supported assets ('BTC, ETH, SOL, BNB, XRP, DOGE'), which goes beyond the schema's example. It adds meaning without repeating schema details.

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 states 'Complete crypto intel for trading agents' with a clear verb-resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings by being the only crypto-specific tool among many non-crypto tools, and it explicitly lists the three layers of intelligence provided.

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?

The description implicitly tells when to use this tool (when needing crypto intel across positioning, on-chain, liquidation risk) and mentions the pay-per-call model. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternative tools.

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

All HSH Data-on-Demand 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

B3.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but some closely related tools (e.g., hsh-b2b-*, hsh-esg-* variants) could cause confusion. Descriptions help differentiate, but an agent might still misselect similar products.

Naming Consistency3/5

Naming convention is mixed: some tools use hyphens (hsh-b2b-contact), others use underscores (hsh_broker_data_request). While mostly readable, the inconsistency could be confusing for agents expecting a uniform pattern.

Tool Count3/5

32 tools is on the high side for a single server, but given its purpose as a data marketplace, the large number reflects a wide catalog. However, it may be overwhelming for agents to navigate.

Completeness3/5

Covers many data domains but has obvious gaps (e.g., weather, social media). The inclusion of custom data request tools (hsh_describe_data_need, hsh_broker_data_request) mitigates these gaps, allowing agents to request missing data.

Resources