mcp.xynaptic

crypto-movers

Xynaptic Crypto Movers — top gainers and losers 24h with volume filter (CoinMarketCap Pro): clean lists of real movers, not low-liquidity scams, with prices and % changes. GET (?limit=5). Usage: Use to find 24h gainers and losers (liquidity-filtered, anti low-cap scams). For a single asset snapshot use crypto-price instead. [price: $0.020 per call, x402/USDC]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes	query parameters

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 3, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / params / required
```
Added value: +[]
```
- changedInput schema / required
```
Previous value: -[]New value: +[
+  "params"
+]
```

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 2, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / body

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "JSON body for POST endpoints (e.g. insurance, ai-chat, production-risk)",
-  "type": "object"
-}

changedInput schema / properties / params / description

Previous value: -"query parameters, e.g. {city: 'Paris', type: 'Appartement'}"New value: +"query parameters"

addedInput schema / properties / params / properties

Added value: +{
+  "gainers": {
+    "description": "example: 5",
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  "losers": {
+    "description": "example: 5",
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  "top": {
+    "description": "example: {\"symbol\":\"BTC\",\"chg_24h\":3.2}",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}

addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[]
```

First observedOct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the data source (CoinMarketCap Pro), the liquidity/volume filtering behavior, the HTTP method and limit, the return contents (prices and % changes), and the cost/payment model ($0.020 per call, x402/USDC). It omits pagination, rate limits, and exact failure behavior, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Purpose, scope, usage, alternative, and pricing are front-loaded and each sentence carries signal. Slightly padded by marketing phrasing ('clean lists of real movers, not low-liquidity scams') that partly repeats the usage line.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description still covers purpose, filtering rationale, sibling routing, payment, and return contents. It leaves the nested params semantics and error/pagination behavior underspecified, which is the main remaining gap.

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 nominally 100% but the property 'descriptions' are only example snippets, so they clarify little. The description adds just 'GET (?limit=5)', which does not reconcile the schema's odd top/losers/gainers parameters, so baseline 3 is warranted.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: fetch top 24h gainers and losers, filtered by volume, sourced from CoinMarketCap Pro. It explicitly names the sibling it is not (crypto-price for a single-asset snapshot), so an agent can route without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit when-to-use ('find 24h gainers and losers, liquidity-filtered, anti low-cap scams') and names the alternative and the condition that selects it ('For a single asset snapshot use crypto-price instead'). No inference required.

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

All mcp.xynaptic tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?