Skip to main content
Glama

Genexxis paid agent tools (x402)

chainread_multicall

Up to 20 contract reads on one chain in a single Multicall3 request; each call returns success, decoded result and raw hex, or its revert reason. Price: $0.005 USDC per call, paid with x402 on Base.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "calls": "<calls>"
    },
    "name": "chainread_multicall"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
callsYesUp to 20 items {address, function, args?}
chainNoethereum (default), base, arbitrum, optimism, polygon, bsc
blockTagNolatest (default) or a block number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well: it discloses per-call return behavior including success, decoded result, raw hex, and revert reason, plus pricing and payment chain. It omits auth/rate-limit details and whether failed calls are still charged, so it is not exhaustive.

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 sentences, both front-loaded and free of waste. The core operation comes first, followed by return and payment details.

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?

For a three-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers operation scope, return shape, and price. Minor gaps remain around payment mechanics and explicit routing versus the single-read sibling.

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 calls, chain, and blockTag are already well documented. The description reiterates the 20-call limit and single-chain scope but adds no syntax or format details 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?

States a specific verb and resource: contract reads, up to 20, on one chain, in a single Multicall3 request. This clearly distinguishes it from the single-call sibling chainread_read_contract without opening either schema.

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 batch context is clear: use this for multiple reads on one chain in one request. It does not explicitly name chainread_read_contract as the alternative for single reads, nor state when not to use this, so it falls short of fully explicit routing.

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.

Resources