Tanod MCP server

chainpeek: price a Uniswap V3 swap at up to five sizes: price impact, best fee tier and pool, gap to the candle

pre_trade_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a Uniswap V3 swap at up to five trade sizes before trading: view amount out, effective price, price impact versus smallest size, fee tier, pool, gas estimate, and candle gap.

Instructions

chainpeek: Check a Uniswap V3 swap at up to five sizes: price impact and candle gap. For one quote use get_swap_quote. Returns a Uniswap V3 swap quoted at each of up to five sizes, smallest first: amount_out, effective_price, price_impact_pct against the smallest size, the best fee_tier and pool, gas_estimate; plus a reference with the latest 5-minute candle close (WETH/USDC, cbBTC/USDC on Base) and reference_gap_pct to the smallest size's price. A size that cannot be quoted is an error row; none quotable is a 422 or 503 (not charged). Impact is against the smallest size, not the market. Single pool, exact input; not a firm price. Bad input is a 422 (not charged). Typically 1-3 s. Price: USD 0.005. Free: 10 chain reads per IP per UTC day. Docs: https://tanod.dev/learn/uniswap-quote-api.html

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chain`	Yes	Chain to quote on (Uniswap V3): ethereum or base.
`sizes`	Yes	1 to 5 amounts of token_in as positive decimal strings in token_in units, e.g. ["1", "10", "100"]. Distinct; answered smallest first.
`token_in`	Yes	Token sold (0x + 40 hex).
`fee_tiers`	No	Uniswap V3 fee tiers to consider (100, 500, 3000, 10000). Default: all four.
`token_out`	Yes	Token bought (0x + 40 hex).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`dex`	No
`note`	No
`block`	No
`chain`	No
`error`	No	Only on an error result: an object {code, message}, or the reason string of an x402 PaymentRequired object.
`results`	No
`token_in`	No
`reference`	No
`token_out`	No
`disclaimer`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Oct 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, and the description adds meaningful traits beyond them: error outcomes (422 for bad input, 422/503 unquotable, not charged), latency (1-3 s), cost (USD 0.005) and a free tier (10 chain reads/IP/UTC day). It also clarifies the semantic subtlety that impact is measured against the smallest size, not the market, and that the result is not a firm price.

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?

Purpose and the sibling alternative are front-loaded, and most sentences carry distinct operational facts. It is dense and slightly cluttered by enumerating return fields the output schema already defines, plus pricing/docs appended in-line, but nothing is fatally wasteful.

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?

For a read-only pricing tool with a full output schema, the description covers usage routing, error semantics, cost and timing, so an agent can call it correctly and interpret partial failures. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema carries most parameter meaning. The description still adds value by explaining ordering ('smallest first'), the impact reference point ('against the smallest size, not the market') and that unquotable sizes surface as error rows.

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 ('Check a Uniswap V3 swap at up to five sizes') with the scope of the check (price impact and candle gap) front-loaded. It explicitly names the sibling get_swap_quote and the condition that separates them, so an agent can disambiguate without opening either schema.

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 an explicit routing rule: 'For one quote use get_swap_quote,' with the multi-size capability being this tool's differentiator. The error-handling conditions (422/503) and refund note further reduce misuse.

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

Deploy Server