quartermaster

tx_status

[Crypto/Base] Check a Base transaction: success/reverted/pending, confirmations, gas, explorer link. Costs $0.002. Choose this for a quick raw status; use payment_receipt for decoded transfers, or settlement_assurance to PROVE an x402 payment settled to the right wallet/amount.

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": {
      "hash": "<hash>"
    },
    "name": "tx_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`hash`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Discloses cost ($0.002) and implies read-only behavior via 'Check'. With no annotations, the description adequately covers key behavioral traits, though it could mention rate limits or auth requirements.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with category, verb, and resource. No unnecessary words.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, output, cost, and alternatives. No gaps.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% as no description for the 'hash' parameter. However, the description contextually ties the hash parameter to the transaction, making its meaning clear without explicit elaboration.

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 clearly states the tool checks a Base transaction and lists specific outputs (success/reverted/pending, confirmations, gas, explorer link). It also distinguishes from sibling tools payment_receipt and settlement_assurance.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly advises when to use this tool ('quick raw status') and when to use alternatives ('use payment_receipt for decoded transfers, or settlement_assurance to PROVE an x402 payment'), providing clear usage context.

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

All quartermaster 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.

Resources

Need Help?