Validate and normalize an Ethereum or EVM wallet address, distinguish valid, absent, or invalid ERC-55 checksum casing, and identify the zero address without a network request.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | Structured EVM address inspection result | |
| meta | Yes | ||
| service | Yes | ||
| version | Yes | ||
| request_id | Yes | Unique request identifier |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / checkout_pathAdded value: +{
+ "pattern": "^/try/",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / executes_automaticallyAdded value: +{
+ "const": false,
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / handoff_pathAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Free full contract and spend-capped command handoff; reading it does not execute or purchase the follow-up.",
+ "pattern": "^/catalog/",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / handoff_payment_requiredAdded value: +{
+ "const": false,
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / maximum_atomic_usdcAdded value: +{
+ "pattern": "^[1-9][0-9]*$",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / sample_pathAdded value: +{
+ "pattern": "^/samples/",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "service",
- "title",
- "reason",
- "method",
- "path",
- "price",
- "input_template",
- "use_output",
- "authorization_required"
-]New value: +[
+ "service",
+ "title",
+ "reason",
+ "method",
+ "path",
+ "price",
+ "input_template",
+ "use_output",
+ "handoff_path",
+ "checkout_path",
+ "sample_path",
+ "maximum_atomic_usdc",
+ "handoff_payment_required",
+ "executes_automatically",
+ "authorization_required"
+]Output schema / properties / data / properties / bytes / maximumAdded value: +20Output schema / properties / data / properties / bytes / minimumAdded value: +20Output schema / properties / data / properties / bytes / typePrevious value: -"integer"New value: +[
+ "integer",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / data / properties / checksumAddress / patternAdded value: +"^0x[0-9a-fA-F]{40}$"Output schema / properties / data / properties / checksumAddress / typePrevious value: -"string"New value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / data / properties / checksumStatusAdded value: +{
+ "enum": [
+ "valid",
+ "not_provided",
+ "invalid",
+ "not_applicable"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / data / properties / inputCaseAdded value: +{
+ "enum": [
+ "lowercase",
+ "uppercase",
+ "mixed",
+ "numeric",
+ "invalid"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / data / properties / isZero / typePrevious value: -"boolean"New value: +[
+ "boolean",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / data / properties / normalizedAddressAdded value: +{
+ "pattern": "^0x[0-9a-f]{40}$",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+}Output schema / properties / data / properties / reasonAdded value: +{
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+}Output schema / properties / data / properties / sourceAdded value: +{
+ "format": "uri",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / data / properties / valid / descriptionAdded value: +"Whether the input is syntactically a 20-byte hexadecimal EVM address."Output schema / properties / data / properties / verificationAdded value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "balanceChecked": {
+ "const": false,
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "chainIndependent": {
+ "const": true,
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "contractCodeChecked": {
+ "const": false,
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "networkRequestsMade": {
+ "const": false,
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "ownershipChecked": {
+ "const": false,
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "standard": {
+ "const": "ERC-55",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "standard",
+ "chainIndependent",
+ "networkRequestsMade",
+ "ownershipChecked",
+ "balanceChecked",
+ "contractCodeChecked"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Output schema / properties / data / properties / warningsAdded value: +{
+ "items": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actionsAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Optional separately priced follow-up calls. Each action requires a new payment challenge and explicit buyer authorization.",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "authorization_required": {
+ "const": true,
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "input_template": {
+ "description": "Client-side template only: $request refers to the original input, $result to this response, and $json(...) serializes its argument. The server does not execute the follow-up.",
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "method": {
+ "const": "POST",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "path": {
+ "pattern": "^/v1/",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "price": {
+ "pattern": "^\\$[0-9]+",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "reason": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "service": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "use_output": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "service",
+ "title",
+ "reason",
+ "method",
+ "path",
+ "price",
+ "input_template",
+ "use_output",
+ "authorization_required"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "duration_ms",
- "cached",
- "sources",
- "warnings"
-]New value: +[
+ "duration_ms",
+ "cached",
+ "sources",
+ "warnings",
+ "next_actions"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral details beyond annotations, such as distinguishing checksum casing, identifying the zero address, and performing the operation without a network request. No contradictions with annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action ('Validate and normalize') and packs all necessary details (ERC-55 checksum, zero address, no network request) without redundancy. Every phrase adds value; minimal waste.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool with one parameter and an output schema (present), the description covers all essential aspects: input type, the operations performed, special cases (checksum casing, zero address), and a key behavioral constraint (no network request). The return format is presumably handled by the output schema, so the description is complete for selecting and invoking the tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema has one parameter 'address' with only min/max length and no description (0% coverage). The description compensates by explaining that the address is an Ethereum/EVM wallet address and implying the expected format via checksum validation behavior. It doesn't give explicit format examples (e.g., 0x prefix), but it provides enough semantic context for an agent to understand the parameter purpose.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's function: validate and normalize an Ethereum/EVM wallet address, distinguish valid/absent/invalid ERC-55 checksum casing, and identify the zero address. It uses specific verbs and resources, making it distinct from sibling tools like base-account-status or base-contract-inspect.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'without a network request' provides clear context for when to use this tool—offline address inspection. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, so it falls short of the highest bar but still offers useful usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.