BlockVectra Docs

Estimate Usage and Cost

estimate_usage

Read-only

Estimate daily and cycle Compute Units (CU) and USD cost for one or more methods and daily call volumes based on /v1/plans method weights and pricing. Pass 'lines' array of {method, calls_per_day}, or legacy single 'method' and 'calls_per_day'.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lines`	No	List of methods and daily call volumes to estimate.
`method`	No	Exact method name (e.g. 'eth_call', 'eth_getLogs', 'eth_blockNumber', 'data.address_balances'). Legacy single-method mode.
`calls_per_day`	No	Expected daily call volume (non-negative integer). Legacy single-method mode.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`method`	Yes
`cycle_cu`	No
`daily_cu`	No
`cu_weight`	No
`cycle_days`	No
`calls_per_day`	Yes
`free_quota_cu`	No
`quota_percent`	No
`cycle_cost_usd`	No
`daily_cost_usd`	No
`max_calls_per_sec`	No
`exceeds_free_quota`	No
`exceeds_rate_limit`	No
`average_calls_per_sec`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 30, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "average_calls_per_sec": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "calls_per_day": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "cu_weight": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "cycle_cost_usd": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "cycle_cu": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "cycle_days": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "daily_cost_usd": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "daily_cu": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "exceeds_free_quota": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "exceeds_rate_limit": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "free_quota_cu": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "max_calls_per_sec": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "method": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "quota_percent": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "method",
+    "calls_per_day"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context by naming the source of truth for the numbers (/v1/plans method weights and pricing), but says nothing about accuracy, whether values are approximate, or how stale pricing affects results.

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 tight sentences: the purpose and calculation basis come first, the calling convention second. No filler, no repetition of the title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers both parameter modes and the pricing source. The only real gap is that it does not characterize the reliability or assumptions of the estimate.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by explaining the two invocation modes — a 'lines' array of {method, calls_per_day} objects versus the legacy single 'method'/'calls_per_day' pair — which is a relationship the schema alone does not spell out.

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 verb (estimate) and precise outputs (daily/cycle Compute Units and USD cost) plus the basis of the calculation (/v1/plans method weights and pricing). It is clearly a compute tool rather than a lookup, which implicitly separates it from get_pricing, but it never names a sibling or states the distinction explicitly.

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?

The description implies when the tool is useful (estimating cost from call volumes) but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and never points to alternatives such as get_pricing for raw price data or get_method_info for validating method names. Usage must be inferred from the purpose.

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

All BlockVectra Docs tools Inspect

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

Need Help?