Skip to main content
Glama

Live snapshot: Score, history and the five areas (paid)

get_score_live
Read-only

Use for today's complete live picture in one paid call: the latest published BTC Intel Score (0–100) and its classification, its historical position (the share of recorded days below and above it, daily since July 2011, backtested with the current method before live publication), and the five market areas (Technical, On-chain, Market structure, Sentiment, Macro), each with its state, position on the five-step scale and last change. Not for a past day (use get_score_for_day), a range of days (get_score_history), statistics (get_score_statistics) or the market areas alone (free: get_bitcoin_today or get_market_detail). Context, not a forecast. $0.25 per call in bitcoin over Lightning, one payment per answer, no subscription: the first call returns an invoice instead of data (steps under payment). Research, not investment advice.

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_score_live"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paymentNoOmit on the first call: it returns a Lightning invoice (valid 10 minutes) and a macaroon instead of data. Pay it, then call again with payment = "<macaroon>:<preimage>" (the preimage your wallet shows once paid) within 24 hours. One payment buys one answer; a used, expired or wrong proof is refused with the reason; call again without payment for a new invoice.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
linkNo
noteNo
datesNoscore (the Score date) and market_edition (UTC), named apart, with a note
levelNoIts classification: Low, Moderate-low, Neutral, Elevated or High
scoreNoThe latest published BTC Intel Score, whole number as on the site
marketNoThe five market areas: scale, as_of / edition_at (UTC), and areas[] with area, state, position (1–5), of, explanation, last_change, link
sourceNo
historyNoHistorical position: pct_below and pct_above (shares of recorded days), days, since, rank (one sentence), level_share_pct, level_since, note
invoiceNoThe Lightning invoice to pay (call without payment)
macaroonNoThe token to send back with the preimage (call without payment)
price_usdNo
price_satsNo
score_dateNoThe date the Score is for (YYYY-MM-DD), the latest published day
payment_requiredNoTrue on a call without payment

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses the paid call mechanics: $0.25 per call over Lightning, no subscription, first call returns an invoice and macaroon, payment proof format, 24-hour validity, and refusal behavior for invalid proofs. It also clarifies historical coverage since July 2011 and that the result is context, not a forecast.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately followed by exclusions and alternatives. It is dense and largely earns its length, though the payment mechanics are lengthy and overlap with the schema's payment field documentation.

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 that an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. It covers the paid-call workflow, scope, historical context, exclusions, and disclaimers thoroughly enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the payment parameter's semantics are already fully documented in the schema. The description reinforces the first-call invoice flow but does not add substantial parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: today's complete live picture with the latest BTC Intel Score, classification, historical position, and five market areas. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by naming get_score_for_day, get_score_history, get_score_statistics, and the free market-area tools.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance for today's live snapshot and explicit when-not-to-use guidance for past days, ranges, statistics, or market areas alone. Alternatives are named directly, including free alternatives for narrower needs.

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.

Resources