Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SwapChan

by io.github.TSavo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Derive receive/change addresses from an xpub (dev tool)

xpub_addresses
Read-onlyIdempotent

List public addresses from an extended PUBLIC key (xpub/ypub/zpub/tpub…): chain (e.g. btc, ltc), kind (p2pkh | p2wpkh | p2sh-p2wpkh | p2tr), branch 0=receive 1=change, start, count ≤ 20. Private keys (xprv etc.) and seed phrases are refused. Pure, offline computation (blocktools); nothing is fetched or stored. How to combine this with the other tools: swapchan_playbook (workflows: find-money, best-swap, rebalance, revoke-approvals, bridge-stuck, token-safety, recover-old-wallet).

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": {
      "xpub": "<xpub>",
      "chain": "<chain>"
    },
    "name": "xpub_addresses"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNo
xpubYes
chainYes
countNo
startNo
branchNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond annotations: private keys and seed phrases are refused, and computation is pure/offline with nothing fetched or stored.

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?

The core behavior and constraints are front-loaded in a dense but readable sentence. The trailing swapchan_playbook workflow list is somewhat broad and could be tighter, but it does not obscure the main purpose.

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?

For a six-parameter dev tool with no output schema, the description covers input formats, safety constraints, offline behavior, and the main derivation dimensions. It could more explicitly state the return shape, but it is otherwise complete enough to invoke correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the parameter burden well: it explains xpub formats, gives chain examples, maps kind enum values, and maps branch 0=receive / 1=change. It is slightly weaker on 'start', which is named but not fully explained as an offset.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List public addresses from an extended PUBLIC key.' It names supported xpub formats and the chain/kind/branch parameters, so the tool's role is immediately distinguishable from generic address or chain tools.

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?

It provides clear usage context: offline derivation from an xpub, refusal of private keys and seed phrases, and a pointer to swapchan_playbook workflows. It does not explicitly compare against sibling tools like address_tool or solana_address, so it falls short of full alternative routing.

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

All SwapChan 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