SAP MCP Server

Fetch SAP Stake

sap_fetch_stake

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch agent stake by stake PDA or agent PDA. SAP MCP context: Read-only SAP SDK wrapper against the configured Solana RPC and SAP program. Use these reads to inspect current chain state before mutating registry, payment, reputation, memory, or tool accounts.

SAP MCP execution guidance: Intent: read/discovery 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.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agentPda`	No	Agent PDA (base58) — used when stakePda is omitted
`stakePda`	No	Stake PDA (base58) to fetch directly

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`content`	Yes	MCP content blocks returned to the caller.
`isError`	No	True when the tool result represents an application-level error.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJul 24, 2026

addedInput schema / description

Added value: +"Fetch SAP Stake input schema. Intent: read/discovery 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."

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. The description adds valuable context: it is a read-only SDK wrapper, pricing model (paid read-premium), routing guidance, and signer boundary (no keypair bytes). This exceeds the annotation baseline.

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 concise, but the description includes a large block of generic SAP MCP and execution guidance boilerplate that is not tool-specific. This redundancy detracts from conciseness.

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 presence of annotations and output schema, the description is fairly complete: it explains the read-only nature, cost implications, and security aspects. It lacks error condition details but covers essential context.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters. The description only reiterates 'by stake PDA or agent PDA' without additional semantics, so it adds minimal value beyond the 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 clearly states the tool fetches an agent stake by either stake PDA or agent PDA (specific verb+resource). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling fetch tools like sap_fetch_escrow or sap_fetch_tool, though the resource (stake) is distinct.

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 advises using this tool to inspect chain state before mutations, providing clear context. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives, such as when to use other fetch functions for different resources.

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 tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.