Skip to main content
Glama

100pro-token-risk

by dev.rendraputra
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Token risk screen (EVM + Solana, read-only)

token_risk_screen
Read-onlyIdempotent

Pre-trade risk screen for an EVM token contract or a Solana SPL mint (Base, Ethereum, BSC, Polygon, Arbitrum, Solana). Returns a markdown report: honeypot/tax/owner flags, LP-lock state, mint and freeze authority, transfer fee/hook, holder concentration, liquidity depth, wash-trade flags, and a final Verdict line. Up to 5 comma-separated tokens per call. $0.1 USDC for a single token contract / SPL mint, $0.25 for a 2-5 address batch, on Base (x402 v2, no account, no API key). An unpaid call answers HTTP 402 with the payment challenge; sign it and retry with the payment in the call _meta. Read-only: it never signs, transfers, or approves anything on the caller's behalf.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainNoOptional. Omit it and the chain is inferred from the address shape (0x… → Base by default, base58 → Solana). Set it explicitly when the same address shape is ambiguous.
tokenYesEVM address (0x + 40 hex chars) or Solana SPL mint (base58). Batch up to 5 addresses, comma-separated. Required.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYesWhich tool produced this result
chainYesChain used, or `auto` when inferred
resultsYesOne entry per requested address, in request order

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / token / description
      Previous value: -"EVM contract address (0x + 40 hex chars) or Solana SPL mint (base58). Batch up to 5 addresses, comma-separated. Required."New value: +"EVM address (0x + 40 hex chars) or Solana SPL mint (base58). Batch up to 5 addresses, comma-separated. Required."
    • changedInput schema / properties / token / minLength
      Previous value: -26New value: +20
    • changedOutput schema / properties / chain / description
      Previous value: -"Chain used for the screen, or `auto` when inferred"New value: +"Chain used, or `auto` when inferred"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / kind
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Which tool produced this result",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / results / description
      Previous value: -"One entry per requested token, in request order"New value: +"One entry per requested address, in request order"
    • changedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / level / description
      Previous value: -"Leading level word of the verdict, uppercased (e.g. PASS, CAUTION, HIGH-RISK); empty when the report produced no verdict line"New value: +"Leading level word of the verdict, uppercased; empty when the report produced no verdict line"
    • changedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / verdict / description
      Previous value: -"The Verdict line exactly as it appears in the markdown report, e.g. `Verdict: CAUTION (3) — 1 high, 2 medium`"New value: +"The Verdict line exactly as it appears in the markdown report"
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "chain",
-  "results"
-]New value: +[
+  "kind",
+  "chain",
+  "results"
+]
  2. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / chain / default
      Added value: +null
    • changedInput schema / properties / chain / description
      Previous value: -"Optional; inferred from the address shape when omitted"New value: +"Optional. Omit it and the chain is inferred from the address shape (0x… → Base by default, base58 → Solana). Set it explicitly when the same address shape is ambiguous."
    • changedInput schema / properties / token / description
      Previous value: -"Contract address (0x…) or Solana mint; up to 5 comma-separated"New value: +"EVM contract address (0x + 40 hex chars) or Solana SPL mint (base58). Batch up to 5 addresses, comma-separated. Required."
    • addedInput schema / properties / token / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "0x833589fCD6eDb6E08f4c7C32D4f71b54bdA02913",
+  "So11111111111111111111111111111111111111112"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / token / maxLength
      Added value: +300
    • addedInput schema / properties / token / minLength
      Added value: +26
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "chain": {
+      "description": "Chain used for the screen, or `auto` when inferred",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "results": {
+      "description": "One entry per requested token, in request order",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "level": {
+            "description": "Leading level word of the verdict, uppercased (e.g. PASS, CAUTION, HIGH-RISK); empty when the report produced no verdict line",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "token": {
+            "description": "The address as requested",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "verdict": {
+            "description": "The Verdict line exactly as it appears in the markdown report, e.g. `Verdict: CAUTION (3) — 1 high, 2 medium`",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "token",
+          "verdict",
+          "level"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "chain",
+    "results"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description goes well beyond this: it explicitly states 'it never signs, transfers, or approves anything on the caller's behalf', discloses the payment model (pricing, x402 v2, no account/API key), explains the HTTP 402 flow with payment challenge, and notes the batch limit of 5. No contradiction with annotations; it adds critical operational behavior.

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?

The description is moderately long but every sentence serves a purpose: purpose, output format, batching, pricing, payment flow, and read-only guarantee. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and returns, and avoids redundancy. The only minor inefficiency is the length, but it packs essential details without fluff.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multi-chain, payment handling, batching, output report), the description is remarkably complete. It covers chain inference, batch limits, exact pricing, payment challenge behavior, and the content of the markdown report including the Verdict. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and interpret the result. The output schema is separately provided, so not repeating its content is appropriate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% for both parameters, and the description enriches them: it explains the chain inference default (0x… → Base, base58 → Solana), gives concrete examples for both token formats, and clarifies the comma-separated batching syntax for up to 5 addresses. This goes beyond the schema's built-in descriptions, providing practical guidance for constructing valid inputs.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb phrase 'Pre-trade risk screen' and names the exact resource type (EVM token contract or Solana SPL mint) plus the supported chains. It enumerates the checks performed (honeypot, tax, LP-lock, authorities, etc.) and a final Verdict, which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools (contract_source_check and wallet_risk_screen) by focusing on token-specific risk analysis.

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 description makes the intended use case explicit ('Pre-trade risk screen') and details the batching and payment flow. It doesn't explicitly name sibling tools or state 'when not to use', but the purpose is unambiguous and the scope (token contract/mint risk) naturally separates it from contract source or wallet risk screens. It also explains the optional chain parameter and when to set it explicitly, aiding correct invocation.

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

All 100pro-token-risk 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