Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

BitBasic

by com.bitbasic
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List validators

list-validators
Read-onlyIdempotent

A network's validators, sorted as its dashboard sorts them (by stake on most networks) or by another figure, each with its status, stake, uptime, commission and delegators' reward rate.

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": {
      "network": "<network>"
    },
    "name": "list-validators"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNoA sort the network's validator list offers (stake, commission, uptime, produced…); a wrong one answers with the ones it takes. Default: the dashboard's.
limitNo1 to 25. Default: 10.
statusNoOnly validators with this status. Default: all.
networkYesA network slug from list-networks.
directionNoDefault: desc.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds context the annotations do not: what the default ordering is (the dashboard's, i.e. by stake on most networks) and the exact payload each validator carries, which matters because there is no output schema.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the resource and then the sort behavior and returned fields; no filler. The parenthetical is slightly dense but earns its place by explaining the default sort.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly compensates by enumerating the returned fields, and it explains default ordering. It does not flag the 25-item cap as a truncation concern or say whether a total/last-page indicator is returned, which is a minor gap for a capped list tool.

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, but the description clarifies the otherwise ambiguous 'default: the dashboard's' sort by explaining it means stake on most networks, and frames sort as 'another figure' the network offers. Remaining parameters (limit, status, direction) are left entirely to the schema, which already documents them adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific resource (a network's validators) and the returned fields (status, stake, uptime, commission, reward rate), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It is a noun phrase rather than a verb+resource, and it never contrasts itself with find-validators or compare-validators, so sibling differentiation is left to the names.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied rather than stated: the tool is for pulling a network's validator list, optionally re-sorted. There is no when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance and no mention that find-validators or compare-validators exist for searching or side-by-side comparison, so routing among the validator tools relies on inference.

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

All BitBasic 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