AgentFeed

Stablecoin flows

get_stablecoin_flows

Read-onlyIdempotent

Stablecoin supply and flows: total stablecoin market cap with 7d and 30d deltas and the top stables by size — the macro risk-on / risk-off dial for crypto. Costs 0.01 USDC per call (x402, USDC on Solana or Base).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	the get_stablecoin_flows payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_stablecoin_flows
`tool`	Yes	the tool that produced this payload

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 25, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "the get_stablecoin_flows payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_stablecoin_flows",
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "const": "get_stablecoin_flows",
+      "description": "the tool that produced this payload",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "tool",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses important non-obvious behavior: the call costs 0.01 USDC and is paid via x402 on Solana or Base. It also explains the analytical significance of the data, giving the agent a clear model of what this call does beyond its safety profile.

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 convey the data content, timeframes, analytical purpose, and pricing with no filler. The core output is front-loaded, and the cost detail is appended as a separate practical note.

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?

For a no-parameter read-only tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description is complete. It states the metric, the deltas, the top-stables breakdown, and the payment requirement, leaving no essential decision information missing.

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?

There are no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool applies, and the description appropriately focuses on outputs and cost rather than inventing parameter guidance.

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 identifies the resource (stablecoin supply and flows) and the specific outputs: total stablecoin market cap, 7d and 30d deltas, and top stables by size. This distinguishes it from the many sibling market-data tools, none of which target stablecoin aggregates directly.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool, framing it as 'the macro risk-on / risk-off dial for crypto.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but with zero parameters and a unique focus among siblings, the intended use case is evident.

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

All AgentFeed 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.