Skip to main content
Glama

Chainflip Broker as a Service

by io.chainflip-broker

Start Swap

start_swap

Start a cross-chain swap. Returns the deposit address where you should send your source asset. API key is optional.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
apiKeyNoOptional partner API key.
sourceAssetYesSource asset identifier (e.g., 'btc.btc', 'eth.eth', 'usdc.eth')
minimumPriceNoOptional minimum accepted price as a destination-per-source ratio (e.g., for a btc.btc to eth.eth swap, 28.5 means 1 BTC gets at least 28.5 ETH). When omitted, automatically calculated from current pool prices with 2% slippage tolerance. Set to 0 to accept any price.
refundAddressYesRefund address on the source chain, used if minimum price cannot be met
destinationAssetYesDestination asset identifier (e.g., 'eth.eth', 'btc.btc', 'sol.sol')
destinationAddressYesDestination address on the target chain

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true. Description adds that the tool returns a deposit address for sending the source asset, which is key behavioral context. However, it does not disclose what happens if assets are not sent, timeouts, or the role of the API key. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and output. No unnecessary words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 6 parameters (4 required) and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and return value but lacks details on post-call steps (e.g., transferring assets) and the minimumPrice parameter behavior (though schema covers it). It is adequate but could be more complete for new users.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description only reiterates that API key is optional, adding no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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?

Clearly states it starts a cross-chain swap and returns the deposit address. The verb 'start' and resource 'swap' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like get_quotes and start_dca_swap.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Mentions API key is optional, but there is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_quotes, start_dca_swap) or the sequence of operations. The context of sending assets to the deposit address is implied but not explicitly framed as a prerequisite.

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

All Chainflip Broker as a Service toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes: status checking, quotes, asset listing, swap initiation. The two quote tools (get_native_quotes and get_quotes) differ in input units, which is clarified in descriptions but could still cause minor confusion for an agent.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (check_status, get_native_quotes, get_quotes, list_assets, start_dca_swap, start_swap).

Tool Count5/5

With 6 tools covering quotes, asset info, swap initiation, and status checks, the count is well-scoped for a swap service without being excessive or insufficient.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the core swap lifecycle: get quotes, list assets, start swaps (including DCA), and check status. Missing potential operations like cancel or list past swaps, but these are not essential for the primary use case.

Resources