Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Iris

by io.github.0xVector0
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Find a token's insiders

find_token_insiders
Read-only

Find the wallets a token's creator is linked to by money (a Solana token, or a Robinhood Chain or BNB Chain one with chain): wallets it funded, wallets that paid it, wallets with the same funder, among the token's earliest buyers, the wallets handed tokens at launch and its largest holders. Says how much of the supply they bought and hold, with the transactions that link them, and why none were found when none were. Costs 2 credits, or without an API key $0.10 paid per call with x402; refunded (never settled) if it fails. Can take up to two minutes. Results are leads, not proof.

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": {
      "mint": "<mint>"
    },
    "name": "find_token_insiders"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mintYesThe token's address: a Solana mint (base58), or a 0x token with chain.
chainNorobinhood for a Robinhood Chain token (Pons launches), bsc for a BNB Chain one (Flap and four.meme launches).solana
limitNoHow many candidate wallets to check (early buyers and top holders). Fewer is faster.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: cost of 2 credits or $0.10 via x402 with refund-if-failed semantics, a latency ceiling of two minutes, and the framing that results are leads, not proof. The annotations only cover read-only/open-world safety; the description carries the operational and interpretive burden well.

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-loads purpose, then layers in outputs, cost, latency, and the 'leads, not proof' caveat — each clause earns its place. The first sentence is long and comma-heavy, which slightly hurts scannability, but there is no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by describing the return payload (supply bought and held, linking transactions, and an explanation when nothing is found). Combined with cost, latency, and multi-chain notes, an agent has everything needed to call it and interpret results.

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%, so mint, chain, and limit are already fully documented with enum and range constraints. The description reinforces that chain selects the network family and that the limit governs candidate wallets (early buyers and top holders), but adds no syntax or format detail the schema does not already provide. Baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource: finds the wallets a token's creator is linked to by money, and enumerates the exact relationship classes (funded, paid it, same funder, earliest buyers, launch recipients, top holders). This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_connections or trace_transfer, which operate on addresses/transfers rather than token-creator insider graphs.

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?

Gives clear usage context: which chain value to pick for Robinhood Chain or BNB Chain tokens, that it costs credits or x402 payment, and that it can take up to two minutes. It stops short of explicitly naming when to use a sibling instead (e.g. analyze_address or get_connections for non-token address work), so it is clear context without exclusions.

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

All Iris 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