SAP MCP Server

sap phoenix get cross chain quote

sap_phoenix_get_cross_chain_quote

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get a cross-chain deposit quote from Relay.link. Generates a deposit address that the user sends funds to (from Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, or any supported EVM chain) and receives USDC on Solana automatically. The user just sends a normal transfer to the deposit address — no wallet connection or bridge UI needed. Free read.

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
`amount`	Yes	Amount in smallest unit (wei for ETH, or raw token units for ERC20). Example: 100000000000000000 = 0.1 ETH. Required.
`recipient`	Yes	Solana wallet address (base58) that will receive the USDC. This is the user's wallet on Solana.
`tradeType`	No	EXACT_INPUT = amount is what you send. EXPECTED_OUTPUT = amount is what you want to receive. Default: EXACT_INPUT.
`originChainId`	Yes	Origin chain ID. Supported: 1 (Ethereum), 10 (Optimism), 8453 (Base), 42161 (Arbitrum), 137 (Polygon), 56 (BSC), 43114 (Avalanche). Default: 1 (Ethereum).
`originCurrency`	No	Origin token address. Use 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 for native ETH/gas token, or the ERC20 contract address (e.g. USDC). Default: native (0x000...000).	0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000

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.

AddedSep 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Adds useful behavioral context beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: Rel.ay.link integration, deposit-address flow, no wallet connection, and signer boundary. However, it directly contradicts itself on cost: 'Free read' versus 'Pricing: paid read-premium; estimate first.' That is material information for an agent deciding whether to run cost estimation before invoking.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The opening three sentences are tight and front-loaded. The appended SAP MCP execution guidance is repetitive: the pricing and routing lines say the same estimate-first/paid-tool instruction twice, and the signer-boundary line is generic. This keeps it from being a model of 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 that an output schema exists and all 5 params are fully documented, the description supplies the missing workflow context: source chains, destination, and the user's action. The contradictory pricing note is a real flaw but is already penalized under behavioral transparency; otherwise the tool is adequately specified for an agent to call it.

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 description coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions, defaults, and enum values, so the description does not need to repeat parameter semantics. The high-level flow language adds context but no per-parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get a cross-chain deposit quote from Relay.link.' It then explains the generated deposit address and the automatic USDC-on-Solana result, which clearly distinguishes it from status-checking siblings like sap_phoenix_get_deposit_status and general bridging tools.

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 clearly frames when to use it: when a simple cross-chain deposit quote is needed, and notes that the user just sends a normal transfer with no bridge UI. The SAP guidance also marks it as a read/discovery workflow. It does not explicitly name an alternative quote tool or say when not to use it, stopping short of a 5.

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.