Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
kukapay

etf-flow-mcp

by kukapay
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

ETF Flow MCP

An MCP server that delivers crypto ETF flow data to power AI agents' decision-making.

Discord Python License Status

Features

  • Unified Tool: The get_etf_flow tool dynamically fetches historical ETF flow data for BTC or ETH.

  • Markdown Table Output: Leverages pivot tables to present data with ETF tickers as columns, dates as rows, and a total column for summed flows.

  • Prompt Guidance: Includes a prompt (etf_flow_prompt) to streamline LLM interactions for user-friendly queries.

Related MCP server: crypto-portfolio-mcp

Prerequisites

  • Python: Version 3.10 or higher.

  • uv: A fast Python package and project manager (install instructions).

  • CoinGlass API Key: Obtain a key from CoinGlass.

  • Claude Desktop: Optional, for interactive querying.

  • Git: For cloning the repository.

Installation

  1. Clone the Repository:

    git clone https://github.com/kukapay/etf-flow-mcp.git
cd etf-flow-mcp

  2. Set Up with uv: Install dependencies using uv:

    uv sync

Usage

Integrating with Claude Desktop

  1. Configure Claude Desktop: Add the server to claude_desktop_config.json (located in ~/Library/Application Support/Claude on macOS or %APPDATA%\Claude on Windows):

    {
  "mcpServers": {
    "etf-flow-mcp": {
      "command": "uv",
      "args": ["--directory", "/absolute/path/to/etf-flow-mcp", "run", "etf-flow-mcp"],
      "env": { "COINGLASS_API_KEY": "your_coinglass_api_key_here" }
    }
  }
}

    Replace /absolute/path/to/etf-flow-mcp/cli.py with the full path to cli.py.

  2. Restart Claude Desktop: Verify the hammer icon appears in the Claude Desktop UI to confirm the server is loaded.

  3. Query Examples:

    • "Show me the latest BTC ETF flow data in a table"

    • "Get the ETH ETF flow history"

Example Output

  • BTC ETF Flow:

    | Date       | GBTC      | IBIT      | FBTC      | ARKB      | BITB      | BTCO     | HODL     | BRRR     | EZBC     | BTCW     | Total     |
|------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|-----------|
| 2025-04-24 | 0         | 327300000 | 0         | 97700000  | 10200000  | 7750000  | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0        | 442200000 |
| 2025-04-23 | 0         | 643200000 | 124400000 | 129500000 | -15200000 | 0        | 5300000  | 0        | 0        | 0        | 917700000 |
| 2025-04-22 | 65100000  | 193500000 | 253800000 | 267100000 | 76700000  | 18300000 | 6500000  | 0        | 10600000 | 0        | 912700000 |
| 2025-04-21 | 36600000  | 41600000  | 88100000  | 116100000 | 45100000  | 0        | 11700000 | 0        | 10100000 | 0        | 381300000 |
| 2025-04-18 | 0         | 0         | 0         | 0         | 0         | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0         |

  • ETH ETF Flow:

    | Date       | ETHE      | GETH     | ETHA      | ETHW     | FETH      | ETHV     | EZET     | CETH     | QETH     | Total     |
|------------|-----------|----------|-----------|----------|-----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|-----------|
| 2025-04-24 | -6600000  | 18300000 | 40000000  | 5100000  | 0         | 2600000  | 0        | 4100000  | 0        | 63550000  |
| 2025-04-23 | 0         | 6400000  | -30300000 | 0        | 0         | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0        | -23900000  |
| 2025-04-22 | 0         | 0        | 0         | 6100000  | 32700000  | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0        | 38800000  |
| 2025-04-21 | -25400000 | 0        | 0         | 0        | 0         | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0        | -25400000  |
| 2025-04-18 | 0         | 0        | 0         | 0        | 0         | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0         |
| 2025-04-17 | 0         | 0        | 0         | 0        | 0         | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0        | 0         |

License

This project is licensed under the MIT License.

Available Tools

1 tool
get_etf_flowA
Fetch historical ETF flow data for BTC or ETH from CoinGlass API and return as a Markdown table.

Parameters:
    coin (str): Cryptocurrency to query ('BTC' or 'ETH').

Returns:
    str: Markdown table with ETF flow data (tickers as columns, dates as rows, with total column).
ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
coinYes

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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 describes the action ('Fetch') and output format ('Markdown table'), but lacks details on error handling, rate limits, authentication needs, or data freshness. It adequately covers basic behavior but misses advanced operational context.

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 well-structured and front-loaded, with a clear opening sentence followed by specific sections for parameters and returns. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient 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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, parameters, and return format, but could improve by addressing behavioral aspects like error cases or data limitations, which would enhance completeness for an API-based tool.

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?

The description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% coverage. It explicitly defines the 'coin' parameter as a string with allowed values ('BTC' or 'ETH') and explains its purpose ('Cryptocurrency to query'), compensating fully 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.

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Fetch'), resource ('historical ETF flow data'), and scope ('for BTC or ETH from CoinGlass API'). It distinguishes the data source and format, making the function unambiguous even without sibling tools.

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 implies usage context by specifying the cryptocurrency options ('BTC' or 'ETH') and the data source (CoinGlass API), but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites. Since there are no sibling tools, the lack of comparative guidance is less critical.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool updatev1.0.0
    • First observedget_etf_flow
Install Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools. The tool's purpose is singular and clearly defined.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool name 'get_etf_flow' follows a clear verb_noun pattern. Since there are no other tools, consistency is inherently perfect.

Tool Count2/5

One tool is too few for the server's apparent scope of ETF flow data analysis. It lacks complementary tools like historical trends, comparisons, or metadata, making the surface feel thin and incomplete for the domain.

Completeness2/5

The tool set is severely incomplete for ETF flow analysis. It only fetches data for BTC or ETH, missing operations like multi-coin queries, date range filtering, summary statistics, or visualization, which are essential for comprehensive coverage.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessUnresponsive

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches