BTC Intel

BTC Intel market detail

get_market_detail

Read-only

Use for the five market areas broken into their published components: each area (Technical, On-chain, Market structure, Sentiment, Macro) with its state on the five-step scale (Adverse, Cautionary, Neutral, Constructive, Supportive), explanation, last change and edition time, and its components (26 in all), each with its state and position. Choose it for component-level detail; for today's read with its forces use get_bitcoin_today, for one area in depth get_area; for the live Score with the five areas use get_score_live. Free. The published market read, as on the Analysis pages. The market components describe the published market read. The BTC Intel Score is computed separately.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_market_detail"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`area`	No	Return only this area and its components. Default: all five areas.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`link`	Yes
`note`	Yes
`areas`	No
`as_of`	Yes	UTC: the last day the answer covers (YYYY-MM-DD), or for the Brief and methodology the time it was published (ISO 8601)
`pages`	No
`range`	No
`scale`	No
`access`	No
`source`	Yes
`built_at`	No
`price_usd`	No
`basis_note`	No
`score_note`	No
`attribution`	Yes
`market_edition`	No
`components_note`	No
`delayed_through`	No	The Delayed date: free answers stop here
`payment_required`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 7, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / area / description

Previous value: -"Optional: one area (technical, on-chain, market-structure, sentiment, macro). All five when left out."New value: +"Return only this area and its components. Default: all five areas."

AddedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: it is 'Free', it reflects the published read 'as on the Analysis pages', and it clarifies that 'The BTC Intel Score is computed separately' — an important boundary so the agent does not expect a score here. It stops short of noting freshness/caching or update cadence beyond the edition-time field.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The guidance sentence is front-loaded and earns its place, but the tail is padded and self-repeating: 'The published market read, as on the Analysis pages. The market components describe the published market read.' The second sentence of that pair restates the first without adding information, and 'Free.' is a fragment tacked on mid-paragraph.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be spelled out, and the description still names the fields the agent will rely on (state, explanation, last change, edition time, component positions). Combined with the sibling routing and the Score separation note, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only data freshness/cadence is unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single enum parameter already documents its values and the 'Default: all five areas' behavior. The description restates the five area names but adds no new meaning about what passing an area changes in the response. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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-and-resource pairing: returns the five market areas with their published components, each area's state on the named five-step scale, explanation, last change and edition time, plus 26 components with state and position. An agent can tell exactly what it gets back and how it differs from get_area (one area) or get_score_live (the Score).

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'Choose it for component-level detail; for today's read with its forces use get_bitcoin_today, for one area in depth get_area; for the live Score with the five areas use get_score_live.' That is a when-to-use plus three named alternatives with the conditions that select them.

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

All BTC Intel 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.

Resources

Need Help?