Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

PayGuard

by co.youraitools
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

OFAC SDN screen of up to 50 crypto addresses

screen_batch
Read-onlyIdempotent

Checks 1-50 crypto addresses against the US Treasury OFAC SDN list in one call (counts as one call). Use it instead of repeated screen_address calls whenever you have several addresses (payee lists, counterparties, transaction inputs/outputs); use screen_address for a single one. Mixed chains allowed; one invalid entry rejects the whole call. Free: 30 calls/day per IP with full results (max 10/min; invalid input is not counted); after that the tool returns an error with the x402 pay URL ($0.01 USDC on Base, Polygon, Arbitrum One or Solana per call at https://api.youraitools.co/payguard/v1/batch) or prepaid credits. Returns count, sanctioned_count, any_sanctioned, list_updated_at and results[] in input order, each {input, address, sanctioned, match_count, matches[], chain}. Read-only; informational screening, not legal advice.

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": {
      "addresses": "<addresses>"
    },
    "name": "screen_batch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressesYes1-50 blockchain addresses, one string per element, e.g. ["0x8589427373D6D84E98730D7795D8f6f8731FDA16", "bc1qxy2kgdygjrsqtzq2n0yrf2493p83kkfjhx0wlh"]. Each: 20-140 letters/digits, optional URI prefix such as "ethereum:" or "bitcoincash:" (stripped); EVM hex and bech32 match case-insensitively, base58 exactly. Chains may be mixed (detected per address). Any chain is accepted; the SDN list covers Bitcoin, Ethereum and other EVM chains (Base, Arbitrum, BNB Chain, Polygon...), Tron, Solana, Litecoin, Monero, Bitcoin Cash/SV/Gold, Dash, Dogecoin, Ethereum Classic, XRP, Verge, Zcash and USDT/USDC addresses. More than 50 entries or any malformed one returns a bad_request error.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / addresses / description
      Previous value: -"1-50 blockchain addresses"New value: +"1-50 blockchain addresses, one string per element, e.g. [\"0x8589427373D6D84E98730D7795D8f6f8731FDA16\", \"bc1qxy2kgdygjrsqtzq2n0yrf2493p83kkfjhx0wlh\"]. Each: 20-140 letters/digits, optional URI prefix such as \"ethereum:\" or \"bitcoincash:\" (stripped); EVM hex and bech32 match case-insensitively, base58 exactly. Chains may be mixed (detected per address). Any chain is accepted; the SDN list covers Bitcoin, Ethereum and other EVM chains (Base, Arbitrum, BNB Chain, Polygon...), Tron, Solana, Litecoin, Monero, Bitcoin Cash/SV/Gold, Dash, Dogecoin, Ethereum Classic, XRP, Verge, Zcash and USDT/USDC addresses. More than 50 entries or any malformed one returns a bad_request error."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover read-only/idempotent/closed-world, but the description adds substantial extra behavior: free tier of 30 calls/day per IP, 10/min throttle, invalid input not counted, all-or-nothing rejection on one bad entry, and the x402 payment path with price and accepted chains. The 'informational screening, not legal advice' disclaimer is also relevant context.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with purpose and the sibling alternative, then cost/limits, then return shape. Dense but nearly every clause earns its place; the payment URL is long but operationally necessary since it is the recovery path on error.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description enumerates the return contract (count, sanctioned_count, any_sanctioned, list_updated_at, results[] with field-level shape and ordering). Combined with cost/limit and failure behavior, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds operational semantics not in the schema summary: mixed chains are allowed, batches are all-or-nothing ('one invalid entry rejects the whole call'), and results return in input order. That goes beyond the schema's per-item format detail.

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?

States a specific verb (screens), resource (1-50 crypto addresses vs OFAC SDN list), and scope (batch, one call). It explicitly contrasts with the sibling screen_address, so an agent can route correctly without opening the schema.

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?

Explicit when-to-use ('whenever you have several addresses – payee lists, counterparties, transaction inputs/outputs') and when-not ('use screen_address for a single one'). Also names the fallback condition after the free tier is exhausted.

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

All PayGuard 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