get_blockGet details for an Ethereum or Base block by number, hash, or 'latest'.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| chain_id | No | Chain ID (1=Ethereum, 8453=Base) | |
| block_identifier | No | Block number, block hash, or 'latest'/'earliest'/'pending' | latest |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hash | Yes | ||
| number | Yes | ||
| gas_used | Yes | ||
| timestamp | Yes | ||
| base_fee_gwei | Yes | ||
| transaction_count | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falseInput schema / properties / block_identifier / titleAdded value: +"Block Identifier"Input schema / properties / chain_id / titleAdded value: +"Chain Id"Input schema / titleAdded value: +"mcp_get_blockArguments"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already declares the safe read-only behavior. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as limits, prerequisites, or edge cases. It remains consistent with the annotation, but does not enrich it beyond the purpose.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action and purpose. No unnecessary words or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
This is a simple read-only tool with an output schema and fully described optional parameters. The description covers the core purpose and identifier types, making it complete for typical use, though it does not mention default chain_id or block_identifier, which is acceptable given schema defaults.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% for both chain_id and block_identifier. The description mentions 'number, hash, or latest', which is already present in the block_identifier schema description. It does not add new semantics beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool gets details for an Ethereum or Base block by number, hash, or 'latest'. This is a specific verb+resource with explicit identifier options, distinguishing it from sibling transaction or metrics tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_transaction or get_chain_metrics. The usage context is only implied by the read operation, with no exclusions or alternative recommendations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target distinct data sources, but several near-duplicates exist: get_token_approvals/get_wallet_approvals, get_defi_positions/get_wallet_positions, and get_wallet_portfolio/get_eth_balance. The descriptions do cross-reference and clarify the differences, so an agent can disambiguate with effort, but names alone are not enough.
The dominant get_<noun> pattern is clear and nearly all names use lowercase snake_case with verb-first conventions. A few tools like calculate, record_predictions, http_fetch, and web_search break the get_ pattern, but the overall style remains predictable.
34 tools is excessive for a single server, even for a broad DeFi/onchain analytics domain. The count is inflated by generic utilities such as calculate, count_text_stats, web_search, and http_fetch, plus multiple overlapping data-retrieval endpoints, making the surface hard to scan.
The set covers an unusually wide range of domain operations: prices, balances, portfolio/positions, approvals, yields, TVL, DEX quotes/volume, transactions, blocks, gas, ENS, contract reads, and risk assessments. It is view-only by design, so missing write/transaction tools is acceptable; minor gaps like address-based token pricing or transaction simulation are workaround-able.