Skip to main content
Glama
bykarantelicom

bykaranteli-mcp

by bykarantelicom
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Exchange coverage: OI, volume, funding and pegs across every exchange we snapshot

get_venue_markets
Read-only

Compare open interest across exchanges: see total OI, top venues, DEX vs CEX share, funding dispersion, and stablecoin pegs. Optionally view per-symbol venue rows or hourly multi-venue history.

Instructions

Call this when the user asks about total open interest across exchanges, which venues hold the most OI, DEX versus CEX share, funding dispersion between venues, or stablecoin pegs. Returns the latest 10-minute snapshot aggregates across every perpetual and spot feed we poll (the coverage field lists them); pass symbol for one coin's per-venue rows.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolNostring, optional base asset, e.g. BTC
history_daysNoReturn the hourly multi-venue open interest history (total, DEX share, OI-weighted funding) for this many days instead of the snapshot

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.27.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / history_days
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Return the hourly multi-venue open interest history (total, DEX share, OI-weighted funding) for this many days instead of the snapshot",
+  "maximum": 90,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Addedv0.9.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark it readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so no need to restate safety. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns 10-minute snapshots, polls perpetual and spot feeds, includes a coverage field, and can return per-venue rows for a symbol. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent anticipate the response structure.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the when-to-call guidance, then the output nature, then the symbol usage. No wasted words, every sentence earns its place. The structure is logical and easy to parse.

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 read-only tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what it returns, the data freshness (10-minute snapshot), and the coverage field. It doesn't describe the exact response schema, but that's acceptable without an output schema. Minor gaps: it doesn't state default behavior when both parameters are omitted, but that's implied.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema descriptions already cover both parameters fully (symbol and history_days). The tool description adds meaning: symbol 'for one coin's per-venue rows' clarifies the filtering behavior, and history_days is explained as 'instead of the snapshot' with the exact aggregates returned (total, DEX share, OI-weighted funding). This adds significant value beyond 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 clearly identifies the tool's function: returning snapshot aggregates of OI, volume, funding, and stablecoin pegs across all exchanges. It lists specific use cases (total OI, venue ranking, DEX/CEX share, funding dispersion) that distinguish it from a generic OI tool. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling, but the scope 'across every exchange we snapshot' sets it apart.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives explicit triggers: 'Call this when the user asks about...' followed by concrete scenarios. It also explains the two modes (snapshot vs. history via history_days) and the symbol parameter's effect. However, it doesn't mention when NOT to use it or suggest alternatives, though the sibling list implies other tools exist.

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