Skip to main content
Glama

Cryptocompare

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Histo Hour

histo_hour
Read-onlyIdempotent

Hourly historical OHLC + volume for a crypto pair (BTC/USD, ETH/USDT, etc.). Use for medium-timeframe crypto charting, swing-trading analysis, multi-day backtests.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eNo
fsymYes
toTsNo
tsymYes
limitNo
aggregateNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
DataNoArray of OHLC candles
TypeNoData type
TimeToNoEnd timestamp of data
ResponseNoResponse status
TimeFromNoStart timestamp of data
AggregatedNoWhether data is aggregated

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "fsym": "BTC",
+    "limit": 24,
+    "tsym": "USD"
+  },
+  {
+    "fsym": "ETH",
+    "limit": 168,
+    "tsym": "USD"
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "Hourly OHLC candlestick data",
+  "properties": {
+    "Aggregated": {
+      "description": "Whether data is aggregated",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "Data": {
+      "description": "Array of OHLC candles",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "close": {
+            "description": "Closing price",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "high": {
+            "description": "Highest price",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "low": {
+            "description": "Lowest price",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "open": {
+            "description": "Opening price",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "time": {
+            "description": "Unix timestamp",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "volumefrom": {
+            "description": "Volume in base coin",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "volumeto": {
+            "description": "Volume in target coin",
+            "type": "number"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "Response": {
+      "description": "Response status",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "TimeFrom": {
+      "description": "Start timestamp of data",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "TimeTo": {
+      "description": "End timestamp of data",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "Type": {
+      "description": "Data type",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds no new behavioral traits beyond return type. No mention of rate limits, auth, or other constraints.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with core purpose. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Adequately covers purpose and usage context, but with 6 parameters and 0% schema coverage, the lack of parameter descriptions makes it incomplete for agents to use correctly. Output schema exists but not referenced.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% and description explains only fsym, tsym (via pair examples) and limit (via examples). Parameters like e, toTs, aggregate remain unexplained, leaving gaps for a tool with 6 params.

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 it returns hourly historical OHLC+volume for crypto pairs, with examples (BTC/USD, ETH/USDT). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying hourly and medium-timeframe usage, differentiating from histo_day and histo_minute.

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?

Explicitly states use cases: medium-timeframe charting, swing-trading, multi-day backtests. Does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives, but the hourly specificity implies differentiation from minute/daily siblings.

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

All Cryptocompare 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.

Resources