Skip to main content
Glama
0xReisearch

REI Crypto MCP Server

by 0xReisearch

get_batch_historical_prices

Retrieve historical price data for multiple cryptocurrencies at specific timestamps using batch queries. This tool helps analyze token price movements across different time periods for research and trading decisions.

Instructions

GET /coins/batchHistorical

Get historical prices for multiple tokens at multiple different timestamps.

Parameters:
    coins: dict where keys are coins in format {chain}:{address} and values are arrays of timestamps
    search_width: time range on either side to find price data (default: '6h')

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
coinsYes
search_widthNo6h

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'get_batch_historical_prices' MCP tool. It is registered using the @mcp.tool() decorator and implements the logic to fetch batch historical prices from the DefiLlama API endpoint '/coins/batchHistorical' using the shared make_request helper.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def get_batch_historical_prices(
        coins: Dict[str, List[int]],
        search_width: str = "6h"
    ) -> str:
        """GET /coins/batchHistorical
        
        Get historical prices for multiple tokens at multiple different timestamps.
        
        Parameters:
            coins: dict where keys are coins in format {chain}:{address} and values are arrays of timestamps
            search_width: time range on either side to find price data (default: '6h')
        """
        params = {
            'coins': str(coins),
            'searchWidth': search_width
        }
        result = await make_request('GET', '/coins/batchHistorical', params)
        return str(result)
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool is a GET operation (implying read-only) and describes the basic functionality, but lacks critical details like rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or response format. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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?

The description is efficiently structured: a clear purpose statement followed by parameter explanations. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core functionality.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (2 parameters with nested objects), no annotations, and an output schema (which reduces the need to describe return values), the description is moderately complete. It covers parameters well but lacks behavioral context like rate limits or error handling. The presence of an output schema helps, but more disclosure would improve completeness.

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?

The description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It explains the 'coins' parameter structure ('dict where keys are coins in format {chain}:{address} and values are arrays of timestamps') and clarifies the 'search_width' default and purpose. This compensates well for the schema's lack of documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get historical prices for multiple tokens at multiple different timestamps.' It specifies the verb ('Get'), resource ('historical prices'), and scope ('multiple tokens at multiple different timestamps'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_historical_prices' or 'get_current_prices', which would be needed for a perfect score.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'get_historical_prices' (which appears to fetch prices for a single token) or 'get_current_prices', nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/0xReisearch/crypto-mcp-beta'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server