Skip to main content
Glama

Get Address by ENS Name

get_address_by_ens_name
Read-only

Useful for when you need to convert an ENS domain name (e.g. "blockscout.eth") to its corresponding Ethereum address.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesENS domain name to resolve
session_idNoOpaque session identifier.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe main data payload of the tool's response.
notesNoA list of important contextual notes, such as warnings about data truncation or data quality issues.
paginationNoPagination information, present only if the 'data' is a single page of a larger result set.
content_textNoOptional human-readable summary used for MCP content responses.
instructionsNoA list of suggested follow-up actions or instructions for the LLM to plan its next steps.
data_descriptionNoA list of notes explaining the structure, fields, or conventions of the 'data' payload.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds that it 'convert's an ENS name, but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as error handling for invalid names or reliance on external data. Given the annotation coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description is a single, focused sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose with no extraneous content. It is front-loaded and well-structured.

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?

For a simple lookup tool with full schema coverage, clear annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It does not need to explain return values because the output schema exists, and the one-sentence description adequately covers the tool's function.

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?

The schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description provides a concrete example 'blockscout.eth' which clarifies the expected format of the 'name' parameter, adding value beyond the schema. No additional information is given for session_id, but it is a generic opaque identifier.

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 clearly states the tool converts an ENS domain name to its corresponding Ethereum address, using a specific verb and resource. The example 'blockscout.eth' adds concrete context, and it is distinct from sibling tools which focus on blocks, transactions, or tokens.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description says 'Useful for when you need to convert an ENS domain name' which clearly indicates the appropriate context. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but no other sibling tool serves this purpose, so the guidance is sufficient.

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.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct blockchain resource or action (address, block, transaction, token, NFT, contract, chain, raw API, session init). Even though direct_api_call is a generic fallback, the specialized tools have clear, non-overlapping purposes, and the complementary nature of tools like get_token_transfers_by_address and get_transactions_by_address is explicitly documented.

Naming Consistency4/5

The majority of tools follow a consistent get_<resource> pattern (e.g., get_block_info, get_tokens_by_address), but there are notable deviations: direct_api_call, lookup_token_by_symbol, inspect_contract_code, read_contract, and __unlock_blockchain_analysis__. These verbs are still descriptive and readable, but the mix of 'get' with other verbs prevents a perfect 5.

Tool Count4/5

With 16 tools, the server is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range but not excessive. Each tool maps to a significant Blockscout API capability, and the count feels proportional to the breadth of blockchain data covered. It is heavier than a minimal toolkit but not bloated.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers core exploration workflows: address info, block lookup, transaction details, token/NFT holdings, contract ABI/source inspection, and read-only contract calls. Minor gaps like a dedicated token-info-by-contract-address tool exist, but the direct_api_call fallback and get_address_info's token details mitigate these. The surface is comprehensive for a read-only blockchain explorer.