Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

opensea_rankings

Fetch OpenSea collection rankings by board (TOP, TRENDING, NEW) and timeframe (1h–all time). Get ranking scores, floor prices, and rolling stats to identify top or emerging NFT collections.

Instructions

List ranked OpenSea collections. Returns the collections on one of OpenSea's ranking boards for a given window, each with its ranking score, floor price, and rolling stats. TRENDING ranks by recent momentum, TOP by absolute volume, and NEW surfaces recently launched collections.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoCollections per page, 1-100
cursorNoOpaque pagination cursor from a previous next_page_cursor
rankingNoRanking board
timeframeNoRanking window

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.17.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / ranking / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "TOP",
+  "TRENDING",
+  "NEW"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / timeframe / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "ONE_HOUR",
+  "ONE_DAY",
+  "SEVEN_DAYS",
+  "THIRTY_DAYS",
+  "ALL_TIME"
+]
  2. Addedv1.16.2

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds semantic detail about what each ranking board means and what fields are returned, but it does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, pagination behavior, or any potential edge cases. 'List' implies a read operation, yet the description could be more explicit about safety and constraints.

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 two sentences long, with the core action front-loaded in the first sentence and all additional details earning their place. No redundant or filler language.

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?

For a list-style tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation, the return contents (ranking score, floor price, rolling stats), and the meaning of the key enum. Missing details like default behavior when parameters are omitted and pagination specifics are partially covered by the schema's cursor/limit fields. Overall sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value for the `ranking` parameter by defining TRENDING, TOP, and NEW beyond what the enum schema provides. It does not add semantics for limit, cursor, or timeframe, but those are adequately described in the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List ranked OpenSea collections.' It then states the output (collections with ranking score, floor price, rolling stats) and distinguishes the three ranking boards. This clearly identifies what the tool does and separates it from siblings like opensea_collections or opensea_top_movers.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description explains when to use each ranking board (TRENDING for momentum, TOP for volume, NEW for recent launches) but never addresses when to choose this tool over sibling tools or provides explicit exclusions. The usage context inside the tool is helpful, but broader tool-selection guidance is absent.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools