Skip to main content
Glama

Laso Finance

by finance.laso
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

save_address_book_entry

Idempotent

Save or rename a recipient

The saved recipient names your human manages on their dashboard, so a request like "send $20 to the coffee vendor" can be resolved to an address instead of asking them for it.

Free.

It operates only on the authenticated account's own book — there is no user parameter to pass.

A name is a label, not an instruction. agentWalletTransfer takes an address and deliberately does not accept a name: a rename between your human asking and you sending would otherwise move money somewhere they did not intend. When you resolve a name to an address, say the address back to them before sending.

The address is the entry's key, so saving one that is already saved renames it rather than creating a duplicate. That makes this safe to retry.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesThe name to save it under. Sanitized and capped server-side (max 60 characters).
addressYesThe recipient's Solana address.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
addressNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / auth_token
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Laso credential. Only if the MCP connection has no Authorization header.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "address": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "address": {
-      "type": [
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "name": {
-      "type": [
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false), it discloses that the address is the key, saving an existing address renames instead of duplicating, retries are safe, and the tool only touches the authenticated account's own book. It also warns that a name is a label, not an instruction, preventing misdirected transfers.

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?

Structured with a bolded critical warning, short paragraphs, and no filler. Each sentence contributes either scoping, retry semantics, or safety guidance; 'Free' is minor but acceptable as context.

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?

Covers scope, idempotency, relationship to transfer, and the no-user-parameter constraint. Output schema exists so return details are covered elsewhere; nothing an agent needs to call this safely is missing.

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 already documents both parameters at 100% coverage; description adds the key insight that address is the entry's unique key and explains how the two params interact during rename. This is meaningful semantic value beyond the schema, though not exhaustive.

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?

Opening line 'Save or rename a recipient' states a concrete verb and resource, and the rest clarifies it manages the human's address book for name-to-address resolution. It distinguishes itself from agentWalletTransfer by noting that transfer takes an address, not a name.

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 gives clear context: use it to persist/rename addresses so the human's dashboard can resolve labels, and it explicitly notes agentWalletTransfer does not accept names. It doesn't explicitly enumerate when to prefer sibling address-book tools like list_address_book or delete_address_book_entry, but the intended workflow is clear.

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

All Laso Finance 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