QuickBuild token-saver tools + x402

Base ERC-20 token info

base_token_info

Read-onlyIdempotent

[PAID $0.002 USDC per call via x402 on Base; errors are free] Inspect a token or any address on Base mainnet: contract vs EOA (incl. EIP-7702 delegation), bytecode size, ERC-20 name/symbol/decimals/totalSupply (raw and formatted; bytes32 symbols handled), proxy implementation (EIP-1967, beacon, ZeppelinOS/FiatToken), owner() and whether it is renounced, whether it is a well-known Base token (guards against spoofed symbols), market (DexScreener: USD price from the deepest Base pair, total liquidity, 24h volume and change, FDV, top pair; cached 60 s; market=0 to skip), and optionally the balance of holder. Read live from public Base RPC; metadata cached 1 h. Many tokens? /api/base/token-batch (10 per call). All params optional: defaults to USDC on Base. Invalid input = 400, never charged.

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": "base_token_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`holder`	No	Optional address whose balance of this token to include.
`market`	No	Include DexScreener price/liquidity (default true; false to skip).
`address`	No	Token / contract address on Base (0x + 40 hex). Optional: defaults to USDC 0x833589fCD6eDb6E08f4c7C32D4f71b54bdA02913.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 2, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / market

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Include DexScreener price/liquidity (default true; false to skip).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedOct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: exact cost ($0.002 USDC via x402), free errors, no charge on invalid input (400), live RPC reads, and cache TTLs (60 s market, 1 h metadata). The spoofed-symbol guard is a notable behavioral caveat an agent would otherwise miss.

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 pricing/payment note is front-loaded and the return facets are grouped logically. It is a single dense run-on sentence, though every clause carries information (cost, defaults, caching, batch alternative), so it is efficient if slightly hard to scan.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-value burden and does so thoroughly: it names every field group returned (bytecode size, ERC-20 metadata, proxy type, owner/renouncement, market stats, holder balance). Combined with cost and caching notes, an agent has everything needed to decide and invoke.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: holder is optional balance lookup, market can be set to 0/false to skip DexScreener calls, and address defaults to USDC with the exact contract listed. It goes modestly beyond the schema rather than merely restating it.

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 (Inspect) and resource (a token or any address on Base mainnet), then enumerates the exact facets returned: contract vs EOA, ERC-20 metadata, proxy implementation, owner status, known-token flag, and market data. This is far more specific than siblings like address_brief or base_token_verdict, and it explicitly points to base_token_batch for the multi-token case.

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?

Clearly says when to route elsewhere for volume ('Many tokens? /api/base/token-batch'), states all params are optional with USDC as the default, and notes market=0 to skip pricing. It does not, however, distinguish this tool from base_token_verdict, base_risk, or address_brief, so alternatives are only partially covered.

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

All QuickBuild token-saver tools + x402 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?