Skip to main content
Glama

AurelianFlo

by com.aurelianflo

OFAC Wallet Screen Report

wallet_ofac_report
Read-only

Run a paid OFAC screening report for one crypto wallet and return structured JSON or an inline PDF/DOCX artifact. Use wallet_ofac_screen for a quick single-address status check, or wallet_ofac_batch for multiple addresses.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assetNoOptional asset or network ticker filter such as ETH, USDC, XBT, TRX, ARB, or BSC.
addressYesCrypto wallet address to screen against OFAC SDN digital currency address designations.
output_formatYesSelect json for the structured report payload or pdf|docx for a generated artifact.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoPrimary structured result payload for the tool.
errorNoMachine-readable error code or message when the tool fails.
outputNoNested renderer output when a workflow bundles an artifact render.
reportNoReport-shaped payload when available; null for status-only retrieval responses.
sourceNoSource label, route, dataset, or execution metadata for the result.
messageNoHuman-readable error or status message.
successNoWhether the tool completed successfully.
artifactNoInline generated file artifact. The service does not persist a hosted download URL.
artifactsNoArtifact rendering hints keyed by format.
artifact_summaryNoDelivery and rendering metadata for an inline generated artifact.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which is consistent. The description adds valuable context: the tool is 'paid' (cost implication) and returns 'structured JSON or an inline PDF/DOCX artifact' (output behavior). This exceeds annotation coverage without contradiction.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and output, then alternatives. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff.

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?

Given output schema exists (context signal), return values need not be detailed. The description mentions paid nature, output options, and sibling alternatives. Could mention prerequisites or cost details, but overall sufficient for a report tool with moderate complexity.

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 100% with each parameter described. The description adds context about output_format (structured vs artifact) but does not significantly elaborate on parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Run a paid OFAC screening report for one crypto wallet', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools wallet_ofac_screen and wallet_ofac_batch by mentioning their use cases: quick single-address check and batch screening. This provides clear differentiation.

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?

The description gives direct guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'Use wallet_ofac_screen for a quick single-address status check, or wallet_ofac_batch for multiple addresses.' This explicitly states use cases and exclusions, making it easy for an agent to decide.

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

All AurelianFlo toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are generally distinct, with clear differentiators like single vs batch vs report output. The queue_saved_list and report_saved_retrieve could be confused but descriptions clarify their separate domains.

Naming Consistency4/5

Prefixes like compliance_, wallet_ofac_, report_, queue_ provide consistency within subdomains, though verb order varies (e.g., report_docx_generate vs queue_saved_list).

Tool Count4/5

11 tools are appropriate for a compliance server covering screening, reporting, and optimization. Slightly on the higher side but each tool serves a unique purpose.

Completeness4/5

Covers core workflows: screening, batch, reporting, EDD memos, exposure forecasting, queue optimization, and status checks. Minor gaps like no wallet set management, but overall comprehensive.

Resources