Skip to main content
Glama

SAP MCP Server

by ai.oobeprotocol.sap.mcp

SAP Chart Long Term

sap_chart_long_term

Fetch long-term price history for a Solana token from DexScreener and optional protocol TVL data from DeFiLlama. Returns price changes, volume, liquidity, FDV, and TVL history. Read-only — uses free REST APIs.

SAP MCP execution guidance: Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: priced by hosted x402 challenge. Routing: paid hosted call; call sap_estimate_tool_cost first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool if the runtime cannot handle x402 natively. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mintYesToken mint address (base58) for price history.
protocolNoOptional DeFiLlama protocol slug for TVL history (e.g. "jupiter", "raydium").

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesMCP content blocks returned to the caller.
isErrorNoTrue when the tool result represents an application-level error.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / description
      Previous value: -"SAP Chart Long Term input schema. Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: free; call directly without x402. Routing: free hosted call; call directly and keep it small/exact when possible. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required. Use exact field names from this schema; do not guess aliases or include private key material."New value: +"SAP Chart Long Term input schema. Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: priced by hosted x402 challenge. Routing: paid hosted call; call sap_estimate_tool_cost first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool if the runtime cannot handle x402 natively. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required. Use exact field names from this schema; do not guess aliases or include private key material."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / description
      Previous value: -"SAP Chart Long Term input schema. Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: paid read-premium; estimate first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool when the runtime cannot replay x402 natively. Routing: paid hosted call; call sap_estimate_tool_cost first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool if the runtime cannot handle x402 natively. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required. Use exact field names from this schema; do not guess aliases or include private key material."New value: +"SAP Chart Long Term input schema. Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: free; call directly without x402. Routing: free hosted call; call directly and keep it small/exact when possible. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required. Use exact field names from this schema; do not guess aliases or include private key material."
  3. Added

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

Description claims 'Read-only' and 'uses free REST APIs', but annotation readOnlyHint is false, contradicting the description. Although the tool is indeed read-only, the annotation contradicts, forcing a score of 1 per guidelines.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence is clear, but the large block of generic SAP execution guidance is repetitive (also in input schema) and not tool-specific, bloating the description. It fails to earn its place, making the description longer than necessary.

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?

The description mentions what data is returned (price changes, volume, liquidity, FDV, TVL) and data sources. Given an output schema exists, it is adequate but missing details like time range granularity or data point count.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds info about return fields (price changes, volume, liquidity, FDV, TVL) but does not add further parameter meaning or constraints beyond schema.

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 states the tool fetches long-term price history from DexScreener and optional TVL from DeFiLlama. It uses specific verbs (Fetch) and resources (Solana token, protocol slug), and the context of sibling chart tools implies differentiation, though not explicitly stated.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sap_chart_ohlc, sap_chart_indicators). The generic SAP execution guidance (estimate cost, signing) is not tool-specific usage advice.

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

All SAP MCP Server toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are organized by protocol prefix (e.g., adrena_, jupiter_, sap_) which helps distinguish domains. Within each protocol, tool names clearly indicate actions (e.g., openPosition, getQuote). However, with 360 tools, some cross-protocol overlaps (e.g., multiple swap tools) and many similar fetch tools in the sap_* family require careful reading of descriptions to disambiguate.

Naming Consistency4/5

Each protocol group follows a consistent naming convention (e.g., snake_case for adrena_, camelCase for 3land, sap_ prefix for SAP SDK tools). The mix of conventions across protocols is acceptable, though a uniform style would improve predictability. Minor inconsistency: hyphenated names like metaplex-nft_ vs underscores.

Tool Count2/5

360 tools is far too many for a well-scoped MCP server. This aggregates dozens of protocols and SAP-specific features, making navigation difficult. The server would benefit from being split into focused micro-servers (e.g., SAP identity, Jupiter DEX, NFT tools). The current count overwhelms the coherence of the set.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a vast range of Solana ecosystem activities: token operations, swaps, staking, NFT management, bridging, oracle data, identity registration, chat, escrow, subscriptions, and premium streaming. Major lifecycle operations are present, though some niche subdomains may have missing functions (e.g., detailed governance or lending management). Overall, it's comprehensive for the intended scope.

Resources