ScorpTech x402 API

Evm Logs

evm_logs

Read-onlyIdempotent

Decoded event logs for any contract and event on Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, OP Mainnet, Polygon or BNB Chain: give the event as a human signature (e.g. "Transfer(address indexed from, address indexed to, uint256 value)"), optional indexed-topic filters, and get the newest matching logs with named, ABI-decoded arguments (exact integers as strings, checksummed addresses). Scans backwards from the head with an adaptive block window. Keyless public RPC. Price: $0.01 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: GET https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/evm-logs

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": {
      "address": "<address>",
      "event": "<event>"
    },
    "name": "evm_logs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chain`	No	eth (default), base, arbitrum, optimism, polygon or bsc (chain ids and common aliases accepted)
`event`	Yes	Event signature, e.g. "Swap(address indexed sender, uint256 amount0In, ...)". Mark indexed params; without "indexed" the first N params are assumed indexed from the topic count
`limit`	No	Max logs returned, newest first
`blocks`	No	Max blocks to scan back from toBlock
`topic1`	No	Filter on the 1st indexed param: address, uint (decimal) or 32-byte hex
`topic2`	No	Filter on the 2nd indexed param
`topic3`	No	Filter on the 3rd indexed param
`address`	Yes	Contract address emitting the event (0x, 20 bytes)
`toBlock`	No	Newest block to scan (default head)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: cost ($0.01 USDC per successful call via x402 on Solana), keyless public RPC, adaptive backward block-window scanning, and an HTTPS fallback endpoint. It also describes the return shape (ABI-decoded named args, integers as strings, checksummed addresses), which matters since no output schema exists. Nothing here contradicts readOnly/idempotent hints.

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 key call pattern in the first sentence; the pricing and HTTPS line is genuinely useful. It is a long, comma-heavy run-on that could be tightened, but no sentence is filler.

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?

Given a 9-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers return formatting, chain coverage, scanning behavior, and payment. Minor gaps remain: behavior when no logs match, and whether the limit/blocks interplay can truncate results silently.

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 all nine parameters are already documented, including the indexed-param convention on 'event'. The description restates the signature format and topic filters but adds no syntax or edge-case detail (e.g., how topicN interacts with the indexed assumption) 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 ('decoded event logs for any contract and event') plus the exact chain set and the decoded-output promise. It is implicitly distinguished from siblings like evm_read and evm_token_transfers because it fetches raw logs for an arbitrary event signature rather than token transfers or contract state.

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?

Explains the required invocation pattern (human-readable event signature, optional indexed-topic filters, scanning backwards from head) so an agent knows how to use it. It does not name alternatives such as evm_token_transfers or evm_read, nor state when this tool is the wrong choice.

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

All ScorpTech x402 API 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?