Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Solana Pulse: agent safety layer

by io.github.Timothymycompc
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

trace

Read-onlyIdempotent

Run when a wallet was drained or money went missing, or before trusting an address someone gave you: follows the money and flags sweeper, pass-through and lookalike-address patterns. Follows a wallet's money through its recent transactions: net SOL and token change and the other side of each, where most money went, and drain patterns with evidence. Example: {"wallet": "", "how_many": 25}. Cost: 25 free calls a day, then $0.02 USDC per call (x402). Outputs explained: GET /api/tools/trace.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
beforeNoStart below this transaction, to page further back. next_before from the previous answer.
walletYesThe wallet to follow. The user's wallet, or an address from their report. Never make one up.
networkNoDefault "mainnet-beta" (real money). "devnet" only for test wallets.mainnet-beta
how_manyNoHow many recent transactions to read, newest first (1-50, default 25). More covers a longer stretch of time.
time_zoneNoThe person's time zone, so the report shows their clock time next to UTC, e.g. America/Chicago. Ask them, or leave it out for UTC only.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / time_zone
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The person's time zone, so the report shows their clock time next to UTC, e.g. America/Chicago. Ask them, or leave it out for UTC only.",
+  "maxLength": 64,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, open-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description still adds valuable beyond-schema context: pricing (25 free calls/day then $0.02 USDC via x402) and a pointer to output docs. It stops short of 5 by not detailing rate-limit failure modes or result size beyond the paging param.

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 the trigger conditions and then the mechanics, which is good ordering. There is minor redundancy between 'follows the money' and 'Follows a wallet's money through its recent transactions', but overall it is dense with little waste.

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, but the description compensates with a concrete example, pricing, and a pointer to the output documentation, plus an explicit enumeration of what is returned. Enough for an agent to invoke correctly, though the output-docs pointer is off-tool.

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 schema already documents all five parameters including the paging cursor and time zone. The description only adds a sample invocation ({wallet, how_many}) and does not deepen parameter meaning, which is the correct baseline expectation.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource — follows a wallet's money through its recent transactions — and lists distinguishing outputs (net SOL/token change, counterparties, where most money went, drain patterns with evidence). This clearly separates it from generic siblings like history or wallet.

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 explicit triggering conditions: 'when a wallet was drained or money went missing, or before trusting an address someone gave you.' It does not name an alternative sibling (e.g. why use this over history or token_safety), so it stops short of 5.

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

All Solana Pulse: agent safety layer 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