Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Prax Data Services

by com.orabrain
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Screen wallets (batch)

screen_wallets_batch
Read-onlyIdempotent

Bulk wallet screening: screen_wallet for up to 50 addresses in one call - portfolio, customer-base or deposit-address sweeps. Returns per-address risk band and labels plus a summary. Builder plan and above; 10 credits per call.

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": {
      "addresses": "<addresses>"
    },
    "name": "screen_wallets_batch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainNoeth
addressesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful operational context beyond them: the per-address risk band/labels plus a summary in the response, a Builder-plan entitlement requirement, and a 10-credit-per-call cost. It does not cover pagination or failure handling for malformed addresses.

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?

A single tightly packed sentence front-loads the purpose and batching scope before the use cases and constraints. The pricing/plan clause is somewhat grafted onto the end but still earns its place as a decision-relevant constraint.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, yet the description adequately sketches the return value (per-address risk band, labels, summary). However, for a tool with 0% schema coverage, leaving the 'chain' parameter's semantics undefined is a meaningful hole an agent could stumble on when screening non-Ethereum addresses.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it only partly does: 'up to 50 addresses' merely restates the schema's maxItems, and the 'chain' parameter (default 'eth') is not mentioned at all — no guidance on accepted values (chain IDs vs. names) or what happens when it is omitted. The address parameter's intent is clear from the use cases, but the second parameter is entirely undocumented.

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 ('Bulk wallet screening'), names the single-address sibling it parallels ('screen_wallet'), and pins the batch ceiling at 50 addresses in one call. An agent can distinguish it from screen_wallet 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?

Gives three concrete use cases (portfolio, customer-base, deposit-address sweeps) that tell the agent when bulk screening applies, and the 50-address cap implies the boundary where single screening is preferable. It does not explicitly say 'use screen_wallet for a single address' or exclude other siblings, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Prax Data Services 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