Skip to main content
Glama

DERO MCP Server

by io.github.DHEBP

dero_durl_to_scid

Read-only

Composite: resolve a TELA dURL (e.g. "vault.tela") to its on-chain SCID(s) by discovering TELA apps directly from chain — no external Gnomon indexer required. TELA apps advertise a human-readable dURL; this finds the contract(s) that claim it.

When to call: when a user asks "what's the SCID for .tela", "find the TELA app called X", or gives a dURL and wants the contract. IMPORTANT routing: for a registered DERO NAME like "quickbrownfox" (no dot, not a dURL), use dero_name_to_address instead — that is a name to address lookup, not a TELA app. This tool is only for TELA dURLs (they contain a dot / .tela / a dero:// prefix).

Input Requirements:

  • durl is REQUIRED. A TELA dURL such as "vault.tela", "feed.tela", or "dero://cipherchess.tela". Case- and prefix-insensitive.

Output: { query, normalized, found, match_count, scid, primary, collision, other_candidates[], narrative, related_docs } on a hit; { query, normalized, found:false, match_count:0, hint } on a miss. dURLs are NOT unique — when multiple contracts claim one, the NEWEST is returned as scid/primary and the rest are disclosed in other_candidates with collision:true. The first call triggers a ~10s one-time discovery scan of the newest chain contracts (cached afterward). Feed the returned scid to tela_inspect to view the app.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
durlYesA TELA dURL to resolve, e.g. "vault.tela" or "dero://feed.tela". NOT a registered DERO name (use dero_name_to_address for names like "quickbrownfox").

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses the ~10s one-time discovery scan, caching behavior, non-uniqueness of dURLs, newest-contract-wins resolution, collision disclosure, and miss behavior. This is rich behavioral context that annotations alone do not provide.

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?

The description is structured with clear sections (composite purpose, when to call, input requirements, output behavior) and every sentence adds value. It is longer than average, but the complexity of collision handling, caching, and routing justifies the length.

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 fully covers return shapes for hits and misses, including the collision/candidate structure. It also accounts for first-call latency, cache behavior, and downstream routing to tela_inspect, making it complete for this tool's complexity.

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% and the schema already documents durl with examples. The description adds useful semantics beyond the schema: the parameter is required, case-insensitive, prefix-insensitive, and accepts forms like 'dero://cipherchess.tela'. This raises it above the baseline but is not exhaustive enough for a 5.

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?

The description opens with 'resolve a TELA dURL ... to its on-chain SCID(s)' — a specific verb, resource, and outcome. It also clearly distinguishes this from sibling dero_name_to_address by explicitly noting that non-dURL DERO names belong to that other tool.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit when-to-call guidance with concrete user phrasings ('what's the SCID for X.tela', 'find the TELA app called X') and an IMPORTANT routing exclusion for registered DERO names without dots. This is exactly the level of routing context an agent needs to select between this and sibling tools.

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

All DERO MCP Server 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, with detailed descriptions that specify when to call it and how it differs from similar tools. Composite tools are well-defined, overlapping concerns are minimized.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a general pattern: 'dero_' for core daemon RPC wrappers, 'tela_' for TELA-specific composites, and descriptive names for other composites. While mostly consistent, there are exceptions like 'audit_chain_artifact_claim' and 'dero_durl_to_scid' breaking the pattern slightly.

Tool Count4/5

With 32 tools, the server is comprehensive but slightly heavy. However, each tool serves a specific need in the DERO ecosystem, covering chain queries, docs, TELA, and composite analyses. The count is justifiable given the domain breadth.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers core chain operations, documentation, TELA app lifecycle, and common analytical tasks. Minor gaps exist, such as lack of wallet interaction tools or transaction submission, but these are outside the apparent read-only/analysis scope.

Resources