Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
iran-crypto-mcp

iran-crypto-mcp

by sepehr071
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

List Exchanges

ic_list_exchanges
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists supported Iranian crypto exchanges, their native price units, and the data each can provide for market comparisons.

Instructions

List the supported Iranian crypto exchanges, their native price unit and what each can answer.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ic_list_exchanges"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety and side-effect profile is fully covered without the description. The description contributes a modest amount of context by naming the returned content (exchanges, native price unit, capabilities). It says nothing about ordering, caching, whether the exchange set is static, or response shape, which would have added real value for an open-world listing tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, opening with the primary return content. The trailing clause "what each can answer" is slightly informal and less precise than the rest, which costs it a point but not readability.

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

Completeness3/5

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

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining return values, and it only gestures at them (three loosely named fields) without indicating structure, field names, or cardinality. For a zero-parameter discovery tool this is broadly adequate, but an agent cannot predict the response shape from it.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the schema is an empty object at 100% coverage, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The baseline of 4 applies; the description correctly makes no attempt to describe inputs.

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 uses a specific verb ("List") with a clearly bounded resource ("supported Iranian crypto exchanges") and even previews the returned fields (native price unit, per-exchange capability). That makes it distinguishable from ic_list_markets by domain. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with that sibling, which keeps it from a 5.

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 phrase "what each can answer" implies this is a discovery/capability-lookup tool to consult before calling the data tools, but the description never states when to use it versus ic_list_markets or the ticker/orderbook siblings. Usage is implied rather than specified, and there are no exclusions or prerequisites.

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