legible-check

risk_portfolio

Portfolio risk report for treasuries and large wallets: up to 25 tokens checked in one call, with balance, USD value, a verdict per position, value held in flagged tokens and the largest concentration. Pass the wallet and its tokens. A failed read is not charged. Price: 1.000 USDC per call over x402 on Base or Solana.

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": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "risk_portfolio"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chain`	No	Example: base
`tokens`	No	Example: 0x833589fcd6edb6e08f4c7c32d4f71b54bda02913
`address`	Yes	Example: 0x4200000000000000000000000000000000000006

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load and does disclose valuable operational traits: a 25-token cap, 'a failed read is not charged', and a 1.000 USDC price via x402 on Base or Solana. It omits what the verdicts mean and whether partial failures return partial results.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with capability then inputs then cost; nothing is filler. 'Pass the wallet and its tokens' is slightly redundant against the schema but does useful work as a call cue.

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

Completeness4/5

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 enumerating the report fields, plus payment and failure behavior. The remaining gap is input mechanics—chain semantics and the token list encoding—for a tool that accepts up to 25 tokens.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates 'wallet and its tokens' and adds nothing about the chain parameter or how multiple tokens are delimited, despite the 25-token limit implying a list format.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Portfolio risk report') plus concrete content: balance, USD value, per-position verdict, value in flagged tokens, largest concentration. It is clearly narrower than evm_portfolio and broader than risk_token, though it never names those siblings to make the distinction explicit.

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?

'Pass the wallet and its tokens' implies the calling pattern and the audience ('treasuries and large wallets') hints at when it applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus risk_token/evm_portfolio and no stated exclusions or prerequisites.

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

All legible-check tools Inspect

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.