ScrapeMole Onchain

ScrapeMole Onchain: prices, DEX prices, ENS/Basenames, gas, tokens, balances, holders and transactions on Base and Ethereum: ENS / Basename resolution

ens

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use before sending funds or when you only have a human-readable name: resolves ENS names (.eth and DNS names on ENS, including offchain/wildcard resolvers via CCIP-Read such as .cb.id) and Basenames (.base.eth, read directly on Base) to a checksummed address; or, given an address, returns its primary ENS name and primary Basename, each forward-verified (the name must resolve back to the address). Names are normalized per ENSIP-15. Unresolvable names are not charged. Paid tool: x402 USDC on Base, $0.001 per successful call; call without payment to receive the PaymentRequired object.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ens"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No	ENS name or Basename to resolve, e.g. vitalik.eth or jesse.base.eth. Give name or address.
`address`	No	Address to reverse-resolve (0x… 40 hex). Give name or address.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With annotations already covering read-only/idempotent/open-world, the description adds substantial non-obvious context: ENSIP-15 normalization, forward-verification of primary names, CCIP-Read offchain resolution, and a paid x402 USDC pricing model with unresolvable names uncharged and a PaymentRequired handshake for unpaid calls.

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 the usage trigger, then the resolution semantics, then payment terms; every clause carries information. It is dense and semicolon-heavy, which slightly hurts scannability.

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 still explains what comes back (checksummed address; forward-verified primary ENS name and Basename). Payment, normalization, and failure handling are all covered, leaving nothing an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 both parameters are already documented with examples. The description confirms the name/address duality and what name formats are acceptable, but adds no syntax or validation detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline 3.

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 precise bidirectional verb+resource: resolves ENS names (.eth, DNS, offchain/wildcard CCIP-Read names, *.cb.id) and Basenames (*.base.eth) to a checksummed address, or reverse-resolves an address to primary ENS/Basename. This is unmistakably distinct from siblings like balances, tx, or price.

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 an explicit trigger scenario ('Use before sending funds or when you only have a human-readable name') and clarifies both directions of use. It does not name a sibling alternative or state when not to use it, so it stops short of the top score.

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

All ScrapeMole Onchain 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?