Skip to main content
Glama

Stablecoin Scanner

get_wallet_graph_walk

Read-onlyIdempotent

Bounded walk over the indexed settlement graph of one stablecoin from one wallet on one chain: payer<->recipient hops with value-weighted scores, entity-aware node keys, a stop at known services and sanctioned-node markers. Use it to explain who an address settles with and through which hops. Not for a verdict: get_address_risk. Not for the taint class or haircut: get_address_exposure. Not for a flat list of transfers with tx hashes: get_recent_transactions. token is required and must be a stablecoin enabled on that chain (a refusal names them); hops=0 with stop_on_sanctioned=true is the cheapest check of the subject itself; subjects over the degree gate (~50k edge-rows) return hop 1 only with frontier_truncated=true. Heavy read: under load it answers busy or timeout — retry with backoff, a narrower window or a lower frontier_cap. No auth; 1200 requests/min shared by all tools. An explainability primitive, not a detector verdict, identity/control assertion, AML decision or legal advice. window_from present means the answer was built from that date, the edge-grain horizon, not from the start of the requested window; the default window all, 90d and 1y included (/v1/methodology edge_grain_horizon). When window_from is present, read the graph as covering that span only — do not treat the absence of a counterparty, a path or a sanctioned node as evidence about anything before that date. volume on nodes is the token's raw minor units (divide by 10^decimals); volume_usd6 is the same amount in USD with 6 decimals at peg 1. On Solana (chain -1) the answer carries coverage_status for the subject address only, never for its counterparties: pending — its history is still being filled, so an empty or small answer is not final; partial — filled to a documented bound. The walk shows a finished fill after the next Solana rollup pass (about 10 minutes), and never shows history older than window_from. This read never starts a fill, so pending can also mean none was asked for yet: one compliance read of the address asks for it. A Solana answer without coverage_status could not read it in time — treat it as pending. On Solana (chain -1) the edge grain of 2026-07-20..2026-09-14 is incomplete: those days hold part of their transfers or none, because their raw rows were offloaded before a fix reached production on 2026-09-17; they are not restored, and answers do not mark them (decision of 2026-09-17). Solana's grain is never trimmed, so there the horizon that window_from reports is not where retained data ends: once window_from is later than 2026-09-14 the answer holds none of those days. An answer that reaches them — window_from on or before 2026-09-14, or no window_from over a window that includes them — counts them as floors: at least this much, never the whole, and a counterparty, path or sanctioned node missing from those days is not evidence that there was none.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hopsNoMax graph hops, 0..4 (default 2)
chainNoChain, in any of four spellings: the id (8453 Base — default for 0x addresses; a T… address defaults to Tron and a base58 one to Solana, 1 Ethereum, 10 Optimism, 42161 Arbitrum, 56 BNB Chain, 728126428 Tron, -1 Solana), the same id as a string, the network slug (base, ethereum, optimism, arbitrum, bnb-chain, tron, solana) or its CAIP-2 id (eip155:1, solana:5eykt4UsFv8P8NJdTREpY1vzqKqZKvdp). Surrounding whitespace, a leading + and leading zeros are ignored, a JSON number counts by its value (1.0 is 1), slugs and CAIP-2 ids match in any letter case, and an empty, blank or null chain is no chain at all. Anything else (hex, a decimal fraction, a zero-padded CAIP-2 reference) is refused, and so is a network this scanner knows but does not index — by name, never with an empty clean verdict. The answer is about ONE chain: chain_id says which, chain_source says how it was chosen (explicit|default|address_form) and chains_with_data lists where else this address has data — read it before concluding, then ask again with chain set
tokenYesToken symbol — REQUIRED, the server does not guess it (e.g. USDT). The asset hub page for a stablecoin names its own token.
windowNoTime window: 1h|24h|7d|30d|90d|1y|all (default all)
addressYesWallet address. The address in its network's own spelling: 0x… for EVM chains, T… for Tron, base58 for Solana. The answer writes it in the spelling of chain_id (address) and echoes what you sent (requested_address); address_respelled true means your spelling belongs to another kind of chain than chain_id (a T… address asked about an EVM chain, a 0x… address asked about Tron) — answered about the same bytes there, not refused, and the same owner only for a plain key account.
frontier_capNoPer-hop frontier cap, 1..500 (default 500)
stop_at_attributedNoStop expanding known services/facilitators (default true)
stop_on_sanctionedNoStop once a sanctioned node is reached (default false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / address / description
      Previous value: -"Wallet address (EVM 0x-hex or Solana base58)"New value: +"Wallet address. The address in its network's own spelling: 0x… for EVM chains, T… for Tron, base58 for Solana. The answer writes it in the spelling of chain_id (address) and echoes what you sent (requested_address); address_respelled true means your spelling belongs to another kind of chain than chain_id (a T… address asked about an EVM chain, a 0x… address asked about Tron) — answered about the same bytes there, not refused, and the same owner only for a plain key account."
    • changedInput schema / properties / chain / description
      Previous value: -"Chain, in any of four spellings: the id (8453 Base — default for 0x addresses; a T… address defaults to Tron and a base58 one to Solana, 1 Ethereum, 10 Optimism, 42161 Arbitrum, 56 BNB Chain, 728126428 Tron, -1 Solana), the same id as a string, the network slug (base, ethereum, optimism, arbitrum, bnb-chain, tron, solana) or its CAIP-2 id (eip155:1, solana:5eykt4UsFv8P8NJdTREpY1vzqKqZKvdp). Unknown spellings are refused, and so is a network this scanner knows but does not index — by name, never with an empty clean verdict. The answer is about ONE chain: chain_id says which, chain_source says how it was chosen (explicit|default|address_form) and chains_with_data lists where else this address has data — read it before concluding, then ask again with chain set"New value: +"Chain, in any of four spellings: the id (8453 Base — default for 0x addresses; a T… address defaults to Tron and a base58 one to Solana, 1 Ethereum, 10 Optimism, 42161 Arbitrum, 56 BNB Chain, 728126428 Tron, -1 Solana), the same id as a string, the network slug (base, ethereum, optimism, arbitrum, bnb-chain, tron, solana) or its CAIP-2 id (eip155:1, solana:5eykt4UsFv8P8NJdTREpY1vzqKqZKvdp). Surrounding whitespace, a leading + and leading zeros are ignored, a JSON number counts by its value (1.0 is 1), slugs and CAIP-2 ids match in any letter case, and an empty, blank or null chain is no chain at all. Anything else (hex, a decimal fraction, a zero-padded CAIP-2 reference) is refused, and so is a network this scanner knows but does not index — by name, never with an empty clean verdict. The answer is about ONE chain: chain_id says which, chain_source says how it was chosen (explicit|default|address_form) and chains_with_data lists where else this address has data — read it before concluding, then ask again with chain set"
    • changedInput schema / properties / chain / type
      Previous value: -[
      -  "integer",
      -  "string"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "integer",
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), and the description still adds substantial behavior: heavy-read load behavior with retry/backoff guidance, the ~50k degree gate returning hop 1 with frontier_truncated, the 1200 req/min shared limit, no-auth, and the window_from edge-grain horizon caveat. Solana-specific coverage_status semantics (pending/partial/unreadable) and the incomplete 2026-07-20..2026-09-14 grain are disclosed with concrete interpretation rules.

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 purpose and alternative-routing sentences are front-loaded, but the body is an unusually long, dense wall of mixed caveats (rate limits, Solana coverage, the 2026-09 grain incident) that is hard to scan and repeats horizon/absence reasoning. Much of it earns its place for an explainability primitive, but the overall shape is bloated relative to its size budget.

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, and the description compensates thoroughly by explaining returned fields and their meaning (window_from horizon, volume in raw minor units vs volume_usd6, chain_id/chain_source/chains_with_data, coverage_status). For a complex, ambiguous read it leaves nothing an agent needs to interpret the result unstated.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline would be 3; the description nevertheless adds interpretable meaning beyond the schema — token must be a chain-enabled stablecoin or a refusal names the alternatives, hops=0 as the cheapest self-check, and window_from as the reportable horizon rather than the requested window start. Some parameters (stop_at_attributed, frontier_cap tuning) get limited added semantics, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('Bounded walk over the indexed settlement graph of one stablecoin from one wallet on one chain') and enumerates the exact graph semantics (payer<->recipient hops, value-weighted scores, entity-aware node keys, stop conditions). It names the sibling tools it is not, so an agent can distinguish it from get_address_risk, get_address_exposure and get_recent_transactions without opening their schemas.

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 ('explain who an address settles with and through which hops') plus three named exclusions with the alternative for each, and it points to the cheapest invocation ('hops=0 with stop_on_sanctioned=true'). It also states preconditions (token required and must be an enabled stablecoin) and the failure mode for violating them.

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