Skip to main content
Glama
alexandresanlim

Mempool MCP Server

get-historical-price

Retrieve Bitcoin price data for specific dates to analyze historical market trends and track value changes over time.

Instructions

Returns the BTC price for a specific date (YYYY-MM-DD)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYesThe date in YYYY-MM-DD format

Implementation Reference

  • Registers the 'get-historical-price' MCP tool with input schema (date: YYYY-MM-DD) and thin handler that delegates to GeneralService.getHistoricalPrice.
    private registerGetHistoricalPriceHandler(): void {
      this.server.tool(
        "get-historical-price",
        "Returns the BTC price for a specific date (YYYY-MM-DD)",
        {
          date: z.string().regex(/^\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}$/).describe("The date in YYYY-MM-DD format")
        },
        async ({ date }) => {
          const text = await this.generalService.getHistoricalPrice(date);
          return { content: [{ type: "text", text }] };
        }
      );
    }
  • Core handler implementation: performs the API request to fetch historical BTC price for the given date.
    async getHistoricalPrice(date: string): Promise<any | null> {
      // date format: YYYY-MM-DD
      return this.client.makeRequest<any>(`historical-price/${date}`);
    }
  • Application service helper that delegates to infrastructure request service and formats the response.
    async getHistoricalPrice(date: string): Promise<string> {
      const data = await this.requestService.getHistoricalPrice(date);
      return formatResponse<any>("Historical Price", data);
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns a price but doesn't cover critical aspects like data source, accuracy, rate limits, error handling, or response format. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded: a single sentence that directly states the tool's function without any unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence earns its place by specifying the action, resource, and parameter format efficiently.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity (a data retrieval tool with no output schema and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the return value looks like (e.g., price in USD, timestamp, source), potential errors, or behavioral constraints. This leaves the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'date' fully documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'specific date (YYYY-MM-DD)', which is already covered in the schema's pattern and description. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage, but doesn't provide additional semantic context.

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: 'Returns the BTC price for a specific date (YYYY-MM-DD)'. It specifies the verb ('Returns'), resource ('BTC price'), and scope ('specific date'), making it easy to understand what the tool does. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-price', which might be for current prices, leaving room for improvement.

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-price' (which might fetch current prices) or specify contexts where historical data is needed. This lack of comparative information leaves the agent without clear usage direction.

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/alexandresanlim/mempool-mcp-server'

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