Chainstack

Get Chainstack pricing

get_chainstack_pricing

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch Chainstack's public pricing and return a normalized snapshot.

Use this to answer pricing questions before quoting the user: plan fit, overage math, per-chain dedicated-node costs, and add-on pricing (Unlimited Node flat-fee tiers, Yellowstone gRPC streams, Warp transactions, dedicated-node base rates).

This tool returns the menu, not the bill — the calling agent does the arithmetic. All prices are list prices in USD; disclaimers are surfaced in the disclaimers field.

Per-method RU billing rules are NOT in these sources. Plan-level rates (Full Node = 1 RU, Archive Node = 2 RU) are in the markdown, but some EVM archive-state methods (eth_getBalance, eth_call, eth_getProof, eth_getStorageAt, eth_getCode, eth_getTransactionCount, eth_callMany, eth_createAccessList) and all debug_* / trace_* methods are billed at 2 RU on a full node when called against old blocks. For method-level detail, call search_docs with "request units" or get_doc_page("docs/request-units").

No API key required — sources are fully public. Each call fetches both sources fresh (no caching), so a stale result isn't possible.

Returns: A dict with fields: - pricing_markdown: raw markdown from chainstack.com/pricing.md. Read this for plan tiers, feature matrix, add-on pricing, support levels, PAYG details, and provider comparisons. - dedicated_catalog: user-orderable per-chain dedicated-node SKUs with flavor, regions (as infra slugs like "sgp1"), hourly and monthly prices in USD. - region_legend: slug → city name for every region slug in dedicated_catalog; use it for display. - disclaimers: list-price caveats (Enterprise "from" pricing, etc.). - sources, warnings: per-source status; warnings are set when a source failed and the result is best-effort. - fetched_at: UTC timestamp of this call.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sources`	Yes
`warnings`	Yes
`fetched_at`	Yes
`disclaimers`	Yes
`region_legend`	Yes
`pricing_markdown`	Yes
`dedicated_catalog`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedAug 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent, and the description adds genuinely new operational facts: no API key, no caching (so results are never stale), best-effort behavior with `warnings` on partial source failure, and list-price caveats surfaced in `disclaimers`. It also flags the scope limit that per-method RU billing is absent from these sources.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and the quoting trigger, then scope limits, then return fields — a sound ordering with no filler sentences. It runs long, and the parenthetical list of eight EVM archive-state methods is more enumeration than most agents need at selection time, though it does serve the routing purpose.

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?

A zero-param read tool with an output schema still gets explicit field-by-field guidance on how to use `region_legend` for display and how to treat `warnings`. The known gap (method-level RU rules) is called out with the correct next tool, leaving no ambiguity about where its coverage ends.

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?

There are zero input parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing to disambiguate. The description instead spends its effort on output semantics, which the schema already covers.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch Chainstack's public pricing') plus the return shape ('normalized snapshot'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from doc-lookup siblings by naming `search_docs` and `get_doc_page` as the path for method-level RU rules.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives a concrete trigger ('answer pricing questions before quoting the user') and enumerates the question classes it covers. It also names the exclusion and the alternative tools for that excluded case, so an agent knows when not to call it.

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

All Chainstack 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.