Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

cabal-hunter

by com.cabal-hunter.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

check_cabal_risk

Pre-trade safety check for any Solana token mint: is a buyer about to be someone's exit liquidity? Every wallet cluster carries its evidence_txs.

AFTER YOU BUY: POST /api/watch {mint} with an X-API-Key (any key; add webhook_url on the Pro plan) and we alert you the moment a coordinated dump or liquidity drain starts on that token — carrying the same on-chain evidence. This scan is a BUY check; a watch is a HOLD check, and a holder needs the second one continuously. GET/DELETE /api/watch manage your own. Paid plans: the watch also follows the token's insiders (dev, first-seconds buyers) for 7 days and pushes insider_* events when they sell or move together, each with the transaction.

Layers, ordered by STRENGTH OF EVIDENCE (not marketing):

  1. HOLDER CONCENTRATION — what share one wallet actually controls (top_holder_pct). A single wallet that can crater the price is the most basic rug vector, and it needs no coordination at all. IMPORTANT: we count only REAL wallets. LP pools, locked/vesting supply and other program-owned accounts are excluded and labelled, never scored as a whale — and supply comes from getTokenSupply, not an estimate. Tools that skip this report a locked-supply token as '65% one wallet'. Our numbers reconcile with GMGN's circulating top-10.

  2. SAME-BLOCK BUNDLES — holders whose token accounts were created in the EXACT same block: a multi-wallet launch bought in one slot. A Jito bundle is one way to do that, not the only one - we read the slot, not the bundle. time_sync: true.

  3. COORDINATED DUMP — ≥2 holders each selling ≥25% of their bag in the same block: a cabal exiting in real time. coordinated_exit: true, sold_pct.

  4. HONEYPOT / AUTHORITY TRAPS (Solana-native) — live freeze authority, un-revoked mint authority, Token-2022 transfer-fee / transfer-hook / permanent-delegate traps. Answers: CAN you actually sell this token?

  5. DEV TRACK RECORD — the creator resolved on-chain plus their full launch history WITH the peak market cap each past token hit, so a dead-count can't hide a pump-and-dump. Covers ANY Solana venue: pump.fun, Raydium, Orca, Meteora, PumpSwap. A launch counts only where the transaction actually CREATED the mint, so re-minting supply of an existing token is never miscounted as a launch. reputation (SERIAL_RUGGER / DEAD_ON_ARRIVAL / MIXED / PROVEN) + best_peak_usd, pump_and_dumps count; paid tier adds launches[] (peak_mcap_usd, now_mcap_usd, drawdown, status per launch). 'Ran to $728k, now dust' = this dev has dumped six figures on holders before. Still CAPPED: peak history is evidence, never softens the score. READ deployer.verdict CAREFULLY — two values mean opposite things: FIRST_LAUNCH = we walked the history and found no earlier tokens. UNKNOWN = the history could NOT be established. That is not evidence of anything and must never be treated as a clean record.

  6. FUNDING-CLUSTER TRACE — top holders walked back to a shared funding wallet. A real capability, listed last on purpose: on our own sample it produced no verified detections once infrastructure (curve PDAs, token accounts) was correctly excluded. Treat it as supporting evidence.

Returns risk (CLEAN|MEDIUM|HIGH), cabal_score 0–100, top_holder_pct, cluster breakdown with evidence_txs[], holder map, deployer verdict, honeypot_risk, plus wallets_checked / scan_complete / degraded so YOUR agent can apply its own risk tolerance instead of inheriting ours. If we cannot verify something, we say so (degraded: true) rather than returning a confident 'clean'.

COST: 5 scans/month FREE with no signup and no API key; 250/month free with a key (one email, no card). After that $0.01 USDC per scan. Two ways to pay, no signup or card: (1) a subscription, $9/month for 2,500 scans or $99/month unlimited (fair use 50k) — best for 24/7 bots; or prepaid pay-as-you-go at $0.01/scan (any amount) — POST the tx to /api/buy-key, then send header X-API-Key; or (2) per-call via x402 (X-Payment-Signature header). Full terms: GET /api/info.

FRESHNESS: a token traced in the last 8 hours is answered from that trace in <100ms; computed_at (unix seconds) says exactly when it was traced. Any other token runs the full live on-chain trace and takes 15-20s — set your client timeout to at least 30s or you will abandon a scan that was about to succeed.

Input 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.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and succeeds: it discloses cost, API-key/x402 payment, freshness behavior, timeout requirements, degraded/scan_complete flags, evidence layers, and explicit warnings about ambiguous verdicts. It even advises the agent to apply its own risk tolerance rather than inheriting the service's. This is unusually rich behavioral disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence is well front-loaded, but the description is massively overlong, including pricing tiers, payment mechanics, watch endpoints, and extensive marketing-style detail. Much of that content does not help an agent select or invoke this specific tool correctly, so it fails the 'every sentence earns its place' standard.

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 the tool's complexity, no output schema, and no annotations, the description supplies the return fields, risk semantics, evidence layers, degradation flags, and operational constraints needed to call it correctly. It is complete enough for an agent to interpret both invocation and output without additional structured support.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents mintAddress and pairCreatedAt. The description does not add syntax, constraints, or meaning beyond what the schema provides for those parameters, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The opening sentence states a specific verb and resource: a pre-trade safety check for any Solana token mint. It is not a tautology and clearly indicates a token audit rather than a wallet audit. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling check_wallet_in_token, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives clear usage context: this is a pre-trade / BUY check, while a watch is a HOLD check. It explains when to use the scan and what to do afterward for ongoing monitoring. It does not mention when to use this instead of the sibling check_wallet_in_token, so it lacks full alternative routing.

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

All cabal-hunter 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