Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

TRNCH

by fun.trnch
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Scan a wallet for flagged tokens

trnch_scan_wallet
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check every ERC-20 a Robinhood Chain wallet holds in one call. Returns { wallet, truncated, checked, flaggedCount, tokens }: each token has address, symbol, balance { raw, decimals }, valueUsd when known, the same Trnch verdict as trnch_check { status, category, rugged, dumped }, creator (null when unknown; launch history of the token's creator, bucketed, context only, not part of the verdict), official (ETH, WETH, USDG and official assets are listed without a Trnch check), flagged, canSell (false only for a confirmed honeypot) and, for a flagged token that can be sold, a sell hint: the trnch_sell call to make and a trnch.fun/trade link. Flagged tokens come first. At most 100 non-official tokens are returned, flagged first, then tokens with no known price, then the most valuable (truncated: true when more are held). Cached 60 s per wallet. No key needed. A signal, never a guarantee.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "wallet": "<wallet>"
    },
    "name": "trnch_scan_wallet"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
walletYesWallet address on Robinhood Chain (chainId 4663).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (which already declare this a safe, idempotent read), the description discloses caching (60 s per wallet), the 100-token truncation and its ordering rule, that official assets are skipped rather than checked, that creator history is context and not part of the verdict, and closes with "a signal, never a guarantee." These are exactly the behavioral caveats an agent needs and none of them are available from structured fields.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then the return shape, then operational limits (cap, ordering, caching, no key) — every clause earns its place, and the density is justified because no output schema exists. The long enumeration of token fields makes it a single heavy block that could be broken up, but no sentence is waste.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the full return-value burden and does so thoroughly: top-level keys, per-token fields, nullability of creator, ordering, and truncation semantics. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly or interpret the result is absent.

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 coverage is 100% and the single `wallet` parameter is fully documented with pattern and chainId. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema for that parameter, so the baseline applies even though nothing is actually missing.

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?

"Check every ERC-20 a Robinhood Chain wallet holds in one call" states a specific verb, resource, and scope, and the "in one call" phrasing plus the reference to trnch_check's verdict cleanly separates it from the single-token sibling.

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 whole-wallet scope is clear and the description routes the agent onward, naming the trnch_sell call to make for a flagged sellable token. It stops short of an explicit "use trnch_check instead for a single token" exclusion, so there is still a small inference step.

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

All TRNCH 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