Skip to main content
Glama

Cryptocurrencies

cryptocurrencies
Read-onlyIdempotent

Twelve Data reference list of all supported cryptocurrency symbols with exchange metadata. Use to discover or validate crypto tickers before querying price endpoints.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolNoOptional pair filter (e.g. "BTC/USD").
exchangeNoOptional exchange filter (e.g. "NASDAQ", "NYSE", "Binance").

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoResponse code
statusNoResponse status
messageNoResponse message

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, making safety clear. The description adds useful context about being a 'reference list' with 'exchange metadata' and 'all supported' symbols. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but the core behavioral expectation is transparent.

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 sentences that are front-loaded and efficient. The first sentence defines the tool's purpose and source, the second provides usage guidance. No redundant or filler content.

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 simplicity (2 optional parameters, high schema coverage, output schema exists), the description fully equips the agent to use it correctly. It explains why to use it (discovery/validation before price queries) and what it returns (symbols with exchange metadata).

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 well-described parameters (e.g., 'Optional pair filter (e.g. "BTC/USD")'). The tool description does not add any additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 provides a 'reference list of all supported cryptocurrency symbols with exchange metadata' using the verb 'discover or validate'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'stocks' and 'forex_pairs' by targeting crypto tickers specifically.

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 explicitly says 'Use to discover or validate crypto tickers before querying price endpoints', providing clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or list alternative tools, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

While many tools have distinct purposes, there is notable overlap between price, quote, eod, and time_series for price data. Also, the multiple ask_pipeworx variants and deep_research could cause confusion about which to use for factual queries. Some tools like bet_research and polymarket_arbitrage also have overlapping domains.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a descriptive snake_case pattern (ai_visibility_check, ask_pipeworx, compare_entities). A few are single words (cryptocurrencies, indices, profile) which is acceptable. No mixing of camelCase or other conventions, so consistent overall.

Tool Count2/5

47 tools is quite high for a single server. While the domain is broad (financial data, prediction markets, SEC filings, etc.), many tools are highly specific (e.g., polymarket_arbitrage, bet_research, scan_dependency) and could be consolidated. The count feels bloated and adds cognitive load.

Completeness4/5

The tool set is impressively comprehensive, covering stocks, forex, crypto, economic data, SEC filings, prediction markets, entity resolution, and even claims validation. Minor gaps exist (e.g., limited drug data despite having some tools), but overall the surface supports a wide range of agentic workflows without obvious missing operations.