Paid ($0.002/call): 1-minute cross-venue DEX spread statistics (WETH/USDC on Base, SOL/USDC via Jupiter). Descriptive statistics only; not investment advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pair | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| since | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses the cost ($0.002/call), supported pairs, venues, and a caveat. However, it does not disclose what statistics are returned, how `limit` or `since` affect behavior, or potential errors/rate limits—important details for a paid tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads cost and purpose. Every clause adds value: payment, time window, venue/pair scope, and investment caveat. No filler or redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return values and parameter defaults, but it leaves `limit` and `since` undefined and does not describe the response structure. It provides enough for a basic understanding but is incomplete for a paid tool with additional parameters.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, and the description fails to explain `limit` or `since` semantics, including defaults or time range formatting. It partially addresses `pair` by naming supported pairs, but overall the description does not compensate for the missing schema-level documentation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool provides 1-minute cross-venue DEX spread statistics for specific pairs (WETH/USDC on Base, SOL/USDC via Jupiter). It differentiates from the sibling dex_spread_anomalies by emphasizing 'Descriptive statistics only,' though it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'get.'
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives useful context: it is paid, descriptive only, not investment advice, and names supported pairs/venues. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus dex_spread_anomalies or other siblings; the guidance is implied through 'Descriptive statistics only.'
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are clearly distinct: catalog, terms, regulatory events, and sanctions check each have unique purposes. The two DEX spread tools are similar but differentiated by summary vs. anomaly, though they could cause minor confusion without careful reading.
Tool names mix conventions: 'catalog' and 'reg_events' are noun phrases, 'get_terms' uses a verb, and 'sanctions_check' is a noun phrase with a verb component. All use snake_case, but there is no consistent verb_noun pattern across the set.
Six tools is a well-scoped number for a data-provider server, covering catalog, terms, and several distinct data products without being bloated or thin.
The surface covers the core functionality: discovering data via catalog, understanding terms, accessing regulatory events, DEX summaries/anomalies, and doing sanctions checks. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool for raw DEX spread data or detailed event lookup), but the main workflows are supported.