Skip to main content
Glama

Rokha

by ai.rokha
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

orbitx_get_forensics · Orbitx

orbitx__orbitx_get_forensics
Read-only

Forensics: dev wallet, first buyer, bundles, concentration, LP lock, safety flags. — Orbitx's MCP server, a live seat on The Wall (hosted by them). Called through their seat; their data comes back as it is. Read-shaped tools only (anything that buys, sells or writes refuses). Listing: https://rokha.ai/registry?skill=orbitx-official-mcp

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).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds that 'their data comes back as it is' and that it is a read-shaped tool, but these largely restate the annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The note about data fidelity is a small behavioral disclosure beyond annotations, but it does not provide deeper context like output structure or potential rate limits. With annotations already covering the read-only nature, the description adds limited value.

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 core list of forensics items is concise and front-loaded, but the description includes tangential context about Orbitx's MCP server and a listing URL that is not directly actionable for tool usage. The structure is acceptable but includes some noise that could be trimmed.

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?

As a read-only data tool with no output schema, the description should clarify the input (mint) and hint at the return format. It does neither. It also omits the authCode requirement (though present in schema). The tool appears to require authCode for Grok, but the description does not surface this critical context, leaving the agent to infer it from the schema.

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 description coverage is 50% (authCode is described, mint is not). The description does not explain that mint is the token address to analyze, nor does it elaborate on authCode beyond what the schema already says. Since the description fails to compensate for the missing mint documentation, it does not add meaningful parameter semantics.

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 lists specific forensic data points (dev wallet, first buyer, bundles, concentration, LP lock, safety flags) that clearly indicate what the tool returns. The verb 'get_forensics' implies retrieval, and the list distinguishes it from simpler siblings like orbitx_get_safety, though it could be more explicit about the action. It is clear enough for an agent to understand the tool's purpose.

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?

The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of 'use this for comprehensive forensics' or 'for safety-only use orbitx_get_safety'. The list of fields is informative but does not route the agent to or away from any specific sibling. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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

All Rokha toolsInspect
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.

Resources