Retrieve last price, bid/ask, and 24-hour stats for every market in one public call. Use it to monitor exchange-wide ticker data without credentials.
Get tickers (last price, bid/ask, 24h stats) for ALL markets in one call. Public — no credentials needed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does add real value by disclosing that the endpoint is public and requires no credentials. It does not cover response size for an all-markets snapshot, rate limits, or pagination, which matter for a bulk read.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences with the scope statement front-loaded and the auth note second; every clause earns its place and nothing is padded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no annotations and no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields (last price, bid/ask, 24h stats), which is genuinely helpful. It remains incomplete on rate limits, expected payload size across all markets, and the ambiguity against the get_tickers sibling.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case; the description implicitly confirms this by stating all markets are returned in one call with no filters. Nothing further is needed on parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Names a specific verb and resource ('Get tickers') and states the scope ('for ALL markets in one call'), which separates it from single-market siblings like get_ticker/fetch_ticker. However it does not differentiate from the near-identically named sibling get_tickers, which appears to do the same thing, leaving the agent guessing which to call.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
'for ALL markets in one call' implies the bulk-snapshot use case versus a single-ticker lookup, so usage is implied rather than stated. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no routing between this tool and the equally named get_tickers sibling.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.