Skip to main content
Glama

orbitx_get_wallet · Orbitx

orbitx__orbitx_get_wallet
Read-only

Wallet portfolio: SOL balance, holdings, realized/unrealized PnL.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressNoSolana wallet. Omit to use the linked agent wallet.
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. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -true
    • addedInput schema / properties
      Added value: +{
      +  "address": {
      +    "description": "Solana wallet. Omit to use the linked agent wallet.",
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "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"
      +  }
      +}
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the scoped contents of the returned data but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication expectations or response behavior; the auth contract lives in the schema rather than the description.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence that names the resource and its key outputs with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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?

For a simple read-only wallet query with 0 required parameters, the description plus schema provides adequate context: the address omission rule and auth contract are documented, and the output categories are listed. It lacks usage differentiation from siblings, but that gap is already captured in the usage dimension.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description itself adds no parameter semantics, but the schema already documents both the optional address and the authCode behavior in detail.

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 identifies the resource as a wallet portfolio and enumerates its contents: SOL balance, holdings, and realized/unrealized PnL. It is understandable in isolation and distinguishable from most siblings, though it lacks an explicit verb and does not differentiate itself from orbitx__orbitx_get_balance.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as orbitx_get_balance or signet_portfolio. The note about omitting the address to use the linked agent wallet is parameter-level guidance, not tool-selection guidance.

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.