Skip to main content
Glama

orbitx_crypto_scan · Orbitx

orbitx__orbitx_crypto_scan
Read-only

One-shot aggregator: safety + forensics + token payload for a mint.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mintYes
authCodeNoOrbitX authCode from the dashboard paste message or orbitx_auth_link. After auth, pass this on every tool call (required for Grok). Auth contract: signing tools (backend-signed trades, launches, burns, NFT mints) accept EITHER a valid authCode OR an authenticated session (OAuth/API-key bearer from a linked chat). The 5-minute auto-fill sweep and other server-side jobs run under their own internal credential — they never take an authCode. An authCode is sufficient but not the only accepted credential; a missing/invalid credential is rejected, never silently trusted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / authCode / description
      Previous value: -"OrbitX authCode from the dashboard paste message or orbitx_auth_link. After auth, pass this on every tool call (required for Grok)."New value: +"OrbitX authCode from the dashboard paste message or orbitx_auth_link. After auth, pass this on every tool call (required for Grok). Auth contract: signing tools (backend-signed trades, launches, burns, NFT mints) accept EITHER a valid authCode OR an authenticated session (OAuth/API-key bearer from a linked chat). The 5-minute auto-fill sweep and other server-side jobs run under their own internal credential — they never take an authCode. An authCode is sufficient but not the only accepted credential; a missing/invalid credential is rejected, never silently trusted."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -true
    • addedInput schema / properties
      Added value: +{
      +  "authCode": {
      +    "description": "OrbitX authCode from the dashboard paste message or orbitx_auth_link. After auth, pass this on every tool call (required for Grok).",
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "mint": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  }
      +}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
      +  "mint"
      +]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to state safety. It adds that it's a one-shot aggregator, but it doesn't disclose potential latency, partial failure behavior, or what the openWorldHint means in practice.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

One concise, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It captures the core purpose immediately.

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

Completeness2/5

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

No output schema and no explanation of what 'safety', 'forensics', and 'token payload' include or what the response structure looks like. For an aggregator that combines three data types, the description is too terse to be complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 50% (authCode has a description, mint does not). The tool description says 'for a mint' but doesn't explain what a mint is or how to specify it, failing to compensate for the missing schema description of the required parameter.

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 states a specific verb ('aggregator') and enumerates the three data categories (safety, forensics, token payload) for a mint, clearly differentiating it from sibling tools like get_safety, get_forensics, and get_token that fetch these individually.

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 purpose implies it should be used when all three data types are needed at once, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor any mention of alternatives like calling the individual tools.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.