Skip to main content
Glama

Cabal-Hunter — Solana Token Cabal Detection

Server Details

Real-time on-chain coordinated wallet detection for Solana tokens. Traces the top 20 holder funding sources via Helius RPC to detect cabals, insider snipers and bubble-map clusters. Returns a cabal confidence score 0–100. $0.05 USDC per query, paid natively on Solana. No API key, no account, no subscription.

Status
Healthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL

Glama MCP Gateway

Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.

MCP client
Glama
MCP server

Full call logging

Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.

Tool access control

Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.

Managed credentials

Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.

Usage analytics

See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.

100% free. Your data is private.
Tool DescriptionsA

Average 4.6/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool available, there is no possibility of confusion between multiple tools. Disambiguation is perfect.

Naming Consistency5/5

A single tool trivially ensures consistent naming. The tool name 'check_cabal_risk' follows a clear verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count2/5

One tool for a complex domain like Solana token cabal detection is too few. The tool's description suggests multiple distinct analytical layers (funding trace, bundle detection, honeypot check, deployer history) that would be better served by separate, focused tools.

Completeness4/5

The tool covers several critical detection layers (funding traces, same-block bundles, coordinated exits, honeypot checks, deployer track record). Minor gaps may exist for advanced evasion techniques, but overall it is fairly comprehensive.

Available Tools

1 tool
check_cabal_riskAInspect

Real-time on-chain coordinated wallet detection for any Solana token mint. Three detection layers in one call:

  1. FUNDING TRACE — walks the top holders' history back to launch and finds wallets funded by the same source (classic cabal signature).

  2. SAME-BLOCK BUNDLES — flags holders whose token accounts were created in the exact same block (Jito-bundled multi-wallet launches that route funding through intermediaries to evade funding traces). time_sync: true. 2b. COORDINATED DUMP — flags ≥2 holders that SOLD a meaningful chunk (≥25% of their bag) in the exact same block: a cabal exiting in real time. coordinated_exit: true, clusters[].type='coordinated_exit', sold_pct. 3b. HONEYPOT CHECK (Solana-native) — live freeze authority, Token-2022 transfer-fee / transfer-hook / permanent-delegate traps, mint authority. Answers: CAN you actually sell this token? honeypot_risk: LOW | HIGH.

  3. DEPLOYER TRACK RECORD — resolves the token creator on-chain (works after graduation), pulls their full launch history, and reports how many of their previous tokens are dead. Verdicts: FIRST_LAUNCH / NORMAL / POOR_TRACK_RECORD / SERIAL_RUGGER.

Returns a cabal confidence score 0–100, cluster breakdown, holder map, and a plain-English verdict, e.g. "AVOID — 5 wallets bought in the EXACT same block, controlling 23% of supply. DEPLOYER ALERT: 13 of 13 previous launches dead."

COST: first 100 queries/month FREE — no signup, no API key. After that $0.01 USDC per query — priced at infra cost (it covers the Helius RPC/websocket calls behind each live on-chain trace). Paid on Solana mainnet via x402. PAYMENT: Include X-Payment-Signature header with a valid USDC transaction signature, or call GET /api/info for payment instructions.

Typical response time: <100ms for pre-indexed tokens, 1-5s for real-time analysis.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mintAddressYesThe Solana mint address of the token to audit (base58, 32–44 chars)
pairCreatedAtNoOptional: DexScreener pairCreatedAt timestamp in milliseconds. Speeds up analysis when provided.
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It comprehensively explains the detection layers, the output format (cabal confidence score, cluster breakdown, holder map, plain-English verdict), cost structure (first 100 free, then $0.01 USDC per query), payment method (x402 with X-Payment-Signature header), and typical response times. No contradictions.

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?

The description is well-structured with bullet points and numbered layers, making it easy to scan. While it is somewhat lengthy, every sentence adds necessary detail. It is not overly verbose for the complexity of the tool.

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?

Given no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns (cabal confidence score, cluster breakdown, etc.) and includes cost, payment, and response time details. It covers all necessary context for an agent to understand the tool's behavior and integrate it.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters. The description adds value by explaining that pairCreatedAt is optional and speeds up analysis. For mintAddress, the schema already describes it as a Solana mint address, and the description reinforces this. The description provides additional context beyond the schema.

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's purpose: real-time on-chain coordinated wallet detection for any Solana token mint. It enumerates specific detection layers (funding trace, same-block bundles, coordinated dump, honeypot check, deployer track record), making the purpose extremely specific and distinguishable.

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 implicitly guides usage by detailing the tool's capabilities and output, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. The context is clear, but no exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned. Given no sibling tools, a 4 is appropriate.

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

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources