ScorpTech x402 Tools

Sol Tx Status

sol_tx_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fast confirmation check for up to 100 Solana transaction signatures in one call (getSignatureStatuses with history search): found or not, processed / confirmed / finalized, success or the on-chain error, slot and confirmations, plus counts. Built for agents polling payments or swaps they just sent. Public Solana RPC, read-only. Price: $0.002 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: GET https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/sol-tx-status

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": {
      "signatures": "<signatures>"
    },
    "name": "sol_tx_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`signatures`	Yes	Transaction signatures (base58), comma list or JSON array, max 100
`searchHistory`	No	Also search older ledger history (not only the recent status cache)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only/idempotent annotations it discloses the cost model ($0.002 USDC per successful call via x402), the data source (public Solana RPC), the searchHistory behavior, and the exact result fields returned (status stage, error, slot, confirmations, counts). That is genuine behavioral value an agent needs before calling a metered endpoint.

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?

Purpose, output shape, and use case are front-loaded in the first two sentences, and the operational details (price, HTTPS mirror) are pushed to the end. The comma-spliced enumeration of return fields is dense but each clause carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by enumerating the status stages, error reporting, slot/confirmations, and aggregate counts. An agent knows what it will get back and what it will pay.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters are already documented in the schema, so the description's 'up to 100 signatures' and 'history search' largely restate structured data. Baseline 3 applies; no new syntax or format detail is added.

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+resource (confirmation check on Solana transaction signatures), the batch ceiling, and the underlying RPC method (getSignatureStatuses), which lets an agent separate it from siblings like sol_signatures or solana_tx without opening the 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?

Names the intended scenario explicitly — agents polling payments or swaps they just sent — which gives clear context for use. It stops short of naming alternatives (e.g. sol_signatures for listing an address's signatures) or stating when not to use it, so no full 5.

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

All ScorpTech x402 Tools 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?