Teardrop

Read Contract

read_contract

Read-only

Call any view/pure function on a smart contract and return the decoded result, using a supplied ABI fragment. Supports historical reads via block_identifier and caller_address context for msg.sender-dependent views. Read-only: state-changing functions are rejected.

Use when: Use when a protocol question needs a contract read that no higher-level tool covers — e.g. a niche view function or a protocol outside the standard tool set. Prefer purpose-built tools (get_defi_positions, get_lending_rates) for supported protocols.

Limitations: Requires a valid ABI fragment; payable/nonpayable functions are rejected. Ethereum mainnet and Base only, with bounded RPC timeout and retry.

Alternatives: get_defi_positions, get_lending_rates, get_token_approvals

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`args`	No	DEPRECATED: Positional arguments for the function call. Use 'args_json' for complex objects or Gemini compatibility.
`chain_id`	No	Chain ID (1=Ethereum, 8453=Base)
`args_json`	No	Optional JSON array string of positional arguments for the function call. Use this instead of 'args' for complex types or when calling via Google/Gemini.
`abi_fragment`	Yes	JSON array containing the ABI for the function to call. Supports both modern (stateMutability: view/pure) and legacy (constant: true) formats. Only read-only functions are allowed.
`function_name`	Yes	Name of the function to call
`caller_address`	No	Optional EVM address to supply as msg.sender for caller-dependent view functions. This does not sign or submit a transaction.
`block_identifier`	No	Block number, block hash, or 'latest'/'earliest'/'pending'	latest
`contract_address`	Yes	Contract address (0x…)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes
`chain_id`	Yes
`function_name`	Yes
`caller_address`	No
`block_identifier`	Yes
`contract_address`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed10 schema fields changedAug 14, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / abi_fragment / title
```
Added value: +"Abi Fragment"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / args / title
```
Added value: +"Args"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / args_json / title
```
Added value: +"Args Json"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / block_identifier / title
```
Added value: +"Block Identifier"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / caller_address / title
```
Added value: +"Caller Address"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / chain_id / title
```
Added value: +"Chain Id"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / contract_address / title
```
Added value: +"Contract Address"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / function_name / title
```
Added value: +"Function Name"
```
- addedInput schema / title
```
Added value: +"mcp_read_contractArguments"
```

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 11, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / caller_address

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Optional EVM address to supply as msg.sender for caller-dependent view functions. This does not sign or submit a transaction."
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / caller_address

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Caller Address"
+}

First observedJul 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses behavior beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it explicitly rejects state-changing functions, supports historical reads via block_identifier, and explains caller_address supplies msg.sender without signing. It also states network constraints (Ethereum mainnet and Base) and bounded RPC timeout/retry, giving a full safety and operational picture.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with distinct sections (functionality, usage, limitations, alternatives) and is front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for an 8-parameter tool.

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 and the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, limitations, and alternatives comprehensively. It specifies supported networks, rejected function types, and the non-transactional nature of caller_address. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 parameters are already documented. The description adds context about using block_identifier for historical reads and caller_address for msg.sender-dependent views, which mirrors schema descriptions. It does not introduce new semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Call'), a clear resource ('any view/pure function on a smart contract'), and the output ('decoded result'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from higher-level tools by naming purpose-built alternatives, so an agent can immediately tell when this low-level tool is appropriate.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides an explicit 'Use when' condition (protocol questions not covered by higher-level tools) and instructs to prefer purpose-built tools (get_defi_positions, get_lending_rates) for supported protocols. It also lists limitations (network, ABI requirement, rejected function types) and names alternatives, leaving no ambiguity about when to invoke this tool.

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

All Teardrop 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?