Skip to main content
Glama

Settle on-chain claims for specified markets — the protocol submits and pays the gas

kellian_prepare_claims

Settle claims for the specified markets. There is no calldata to sign or broadcast: the protocol submits each market-local claimPayoutFor transaction itself and pays the gas, since a payout can only ever reach the holder the market names. Each entry in the response is SETTLED (with the transaction hash the protocol sent) or SKIPPED (not yet claimable, with when it will be); claim-all callers continue safely after individual failures. Claim submission applies to onchain markets. Committed markets settle automatically at final resolution; GET /claims/receipts reports exact already-credited payouts. Explicit batch requests return SKIPPED/COMMITTED_SETTLED only after a corroborated payout receipt, with claimed:true and amountAvailable:true. Pending or unproven cases return SKIPPED/NOT_CLAIMABLE_YET, claimed:false and amountAvailable:false; their required amount of zero is an unavailable placeholder, not a credited zero result. No transaction is submitted for a committed market.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "markets": "<markets>",
      "walletAddress": "<walletAddress>",
      "idempotencyKey": "<idempotencyKey>"
    },
    "name": "kellian_prepare_claims"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
marketsYes
proofNonceNoRequired single-use nonce for the wallet proof. Fetch from POST /api/auth/nonce; consumed on verification so the proof cannot be replayed.
walletAddressYesWallet that owns the payout claims
idempotencyKeyYesStable retry key. Reuse only with byte-equivalent tool arguments.
walletSignatureNoAction-bound wallet proof. Sign the canonical 'problee-mcp-auth:…' challenge (binds agent, apiKey, tool, scope, chain, resource, payloadHash, nonce, timestamp).
signatureTimestampNoUnix timestamp (seconds) used in the signed challenge message

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: per-market SETTLED/SKIPPED outcomes, protocol-paid gas, and safe continuation after individual failures. However, the annotations declare idempotentHint=false while idempotencyKey is a required parameter, and the description never explains how retries relate to that key or what the proofNonce/signature flow costs in extra round trips.

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?

Front-loads the key insight (no calldata, protocol pays gas) in the first sentence, which is good. The back half is dense and partially redundant, restating SKIPPED/NOT_CLAIMABLE_YET semantics twice across overlapping sentences, which increases reading cost for the agent.

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 batch mutation with an output schema and rich annotations, the description covers outcomes, failure isolation and the committed-market no-op case, which is what an agent needs to decide and call. Auth and nonce mechanics and the 100-market cap are delegated to the schema, which is acceptable.

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 coverage is 83%, so the schema already documents markets, proofNonce, idempotencyKey, walletAddress and walletSignature. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema; its detail about claimed/amountAvailable placeholders concerns response fields, and an output schema exists, so this sits at the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Settle claims for the specified markets') and immediately clarifies the surprising scope: the protocol submits the claimPayoutFor transaction and pays gas, so the caller signs nothing. It does not name the closely related siblings kellian_simulate_claims, kellian_sweep_claims or kellian_get_claim_status, so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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?

Gives real when/when-not guidance: applies to onchain markets, committed markets settle automatically at final resolution and need no transaction, and GET /claims/receipts is named as the route for already-credited payouts. The absence of explicit routing against simulate_claims and sweep_claims leaves the main alternative-selection gap.

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.

Resources