Skip to main content
Glama

Backtesting Arena

by io.github.Schoasch

Get Deribit BTC Max Pain (latest + upcoming)

arena_get_max_pain

What happened at the last Deribit expiry? Max pain and how spot settled against it: max_pain_strike, spot_at_expiry, %-diff, put_call_ratio, notional. Plus up to 10 upcoming expiries, each with current live max-pain level, days_to_expiry, open_interest_contracts and open_notional_usd. Field semantics: days_to_expiry is floored at 0 and cannot separate "expires later today" from "already settled" — settles_at (full ISO timestamp) and hours_to_settlement (SIGNED; negative = settled but not yet finalized) carry that distinction. settlement_time_utc names the settlement time where evidenced against the exchange (08:00:00Z for DERIBIT_BTC); where not evidenced, all three timing fields are null. open_interest_contracts (upcoming: latest daily snapshot) and total_contracts (settled: last snapshot BEFORE expiry) are the SAME measurement at different observation times; contracts_as_of names the snapshot. total_notional_usd is computed against the SETTLEMENT spot and never changes; open_notional_usd uses the CURRENT spot and moves with spot (notional_spot/notional_spot_date name the reference). oi_available distinguishes "null" from "not collected". Expiry flags NEST rather than partition (quarterly ⊂ monthly ⊂ weekly ⊂ daily): filter on the booleans, read expiry_type as the label — only it separates a Friday expiry from a mid-week one. All flags are calendar-derived, so upcoming expiries carry them too. spot_at_expiry is the exchange settlement price: for DERIBIT_BTC the Deribit delivery price (30-min index TWAP before 08:00 UTC — rows before 2026-08-31 were recomputed from that series; they had carried the BTCUSDT daily close, 16 h later), for IBIT the ETF close of the expiry day. Pass market to switch venue (DERIBIT_BTC default, IBIT). include_strike_ladder=true adds, per expiry, open interest per 2.5 % price band around spot (±25 %, calls/puts, absolute contracts) with day-over-day delta — a stock, not a side: no hedge direction follows from it. include_gex=true (DERIBIT_BTC only) adds per expiry a gex block plus gex_totals across the book — Black-Scholes gamma notional per band from LIVE Deribit mark IV (gex_data_as_of names the fetch, a different observation time than the snapshot fields); the dealer sign is an ASSUMPTION, both conventions published side by side with a zero_gamma_level each. Cron collects daily 02:00 UTC from Deribit Public API. Related: arena_get_max_pain_history (base rates + daily snapshots of open expiries), arena_get_iv_snapshot (implied vol for the same expiries). [Free tier]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
marketNoOptions market: 'DERIBIT_BTC' (default) or 'IBIT' (BlackRock spot-ETF options, collected since 2026-08-24; settlement-timing fields are null until evidenced).
include_gexNoDefault false (response unchanged). DERIBIT_BTC only. When true, each upcoming expiry carries a `gex` block plus `gex_totals` across the whole book: Black-Scholes gamma notional (USD per 1 % spot move) per 2.5 % band from LIVE Deribit mark IV per strike (gex_data_as_of names the fetch, ~10 min cache — a different observation time than the 02:00 UTC snapshot fields). The dealer SIGN is an assumption, not a measurement: both conventions are published side by side (assuming_dealers_short_all, assuming_squeezemetrics_convention) with a zero_gamma_level each; where they disagree, the data does not know the answer. Tau floor 2 h near expiry (tau_clamped flags it); instruments without usable IV are excluded and counted.
include_strike_ladderNoDefault false (response unchanged). When true, every expiry carries a `strike_ladder`: open interest per 2.5 % price band around the snapshot spot (±25 %, calls/puts separate, absolute contracts, share_pct), below_range/above_range sums, max_pain_recomputed (cross-check against the stored level) and `delta` vs the previous day's snapshot on the same band grid (null with delta_reason when there is none). OI is a stock, not a side — no hedge direction follows; the note travels with the response.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_gex
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Default false (response unchanged). DERIBIT_BTC only. When true, each upcoming expiry carries a `gex` block plus `gex_totals` across the whole book: Black-Scholes gamma notional (USD per 1 % spot move) per 2.5 % band from LIVE Deribit mark IV per strike (gex_data_as_of names the fetch, ~10 min cache — a different observation time than the 02:00 UTC snapshot fields). The dealer SIGN is an assumption, not a measurement: both conventions are published side by side (assuming_dealers_short_all, assuming_squeezemetrics_convention) with a zero_gamma_level each; where they disagree, the data does not know the answer. Tau floor 2 h near expiry (tau_clamped flags it); instruments without usable IV are excluded and counted.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_strike_ladder
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Default false (response unchanged). When true, every expiry carries a `strike_ladder`: open interest per 2.5 % price band around the snapshot spot (±25 %, calls/puts separate, absolute contracts, share_pct), below_range/above_range sums, max_pain_recomputed (cross-check against the stored level) and `delta` vs the previous day's snapshot on the same band grid (null with delta_reason when there is none). OI is a stock, not a side — no hedge direction follows; the note travels with the response.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / market / description
      Previous value: -"Options market. Currently only 'DERIBIT_BTC' (default). IBIT planned."New value: +"Options market: 'DERIBIT_BTC' (default) or 'IBIT' (BlackRock spot-ETF options, collected since 2026-08-24; settlement-timing fields are null until evidenced)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / market / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "DERIBIT_BTC"
-]New value: +[
+  "DERIBIT_BTC",
+  "IBIT"
+]
  4. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • removedInput schema / properties / context
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\"",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "context"
-]
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it is exceptional: it explains settlement-time semantics, signed hours_to_settlement, null behavior, observation-time differences between open_interest_contracts and total_contracts, the recomputation of pre-2026-08-31 rows, the dealer-sign assumption for GEX, and the cron collection schedule. It also discloses that expiry flags are calendar-derived and that total_notional_usd never changes while open_notional_usd moves with spot.

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?

Every sentence earns its place — there is no filler and the content is highly informative. However, it is delivered as one dense, comma-heavy wall of text with nested parentheticals and no section breaks, which makes it harder to parse than a structured layout would be. It is appropriately rich but could be better organized.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers all major call-critical aspects: return contents, field semantics, null and signed-value distinctions, venue behavior, GEX assumptions, data provenance, collection cadence, and related tools. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly and interpret ambiguous timing/OI fields.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already documented in the schema. The description adds meaningful beyond-schema context: market switches venue with DERIBIT_BTC default, include_gex is DERIBIT_BTC-only with both dealer-sign conventions, and include_strike_ladder includes a day-over-day delta and a recomputed max-pain cross-check. It does not fully restate every schema detail, but the added operational semantics justify a score above the baseline.

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 opens with a concrete question — 'What happened at the last Deribit expiry?' — and enumerates exactly what the tool returns: max_pain_strike, spot_at_expiry, put_call_ratio, plus up to 10 upcoming expiries with live max-pain levels. It clearly names the resource (Deribit BTC max pain, latest + upcoming) and distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly naming arena_get_max_pain_history and arena_get_iv_snapshot as related alternatives.

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 provides clear context for when the tool is relevant (latest and upcoming max pain, settlement comparison) and names related tools — arena_get_max_pain_history for base rates and daily snapshots, arena_get_iv_snapshot for implied vol on the same expiries. It does not give explicit 'use this when / use that when' exclusions, but the distinctions are inferable from the stated contents of each.

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

All Backtesting Arena 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools cover overlapping market indicators (e.g., cycle state, pulse, bullmarket ampel, volatility phases) and several share similar get_*_history patterns, which could cause an agent to select the wrong one. However, each tool has detailed descriptions with explicit references to related tools to reduce ambiguity.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names generally follow a verb_noun pattern (arena_get_*, arena_list_*, arena_run_*, arena_subscribe_*), but there are inconsistencies such as 'validate_strategy' (no arena_ prefix), 'arena_status' (not a clear verb_noun), and variations like 'arena_run_grid_backtest' vs 'arena_run_backtest'.

Tool Count2/5

With 84 tools, the server is heavily over-scoped for a typical MCP server, likely causing navigation and selection overhead. While the domain (crypto backtesting and analytics) is broad, 84 tools exceed reasonable coherence and impose a high cognitive load.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers a wide range of analytics (market indicators, backtesting, validation, alerts, subscriptions, reports) with few obvious dead ends. Minor gaps exist like lack of direct portfolio management or strategy editing, but core workflows are well covered.

Resources