Skip to main content
Glama

WattCoin: Get WATT token info

get_watt_token_info
Read-onlyIdempotent

WattCoin: WATT token reference data: mint address, payment wallet, live USD and SOL price, liquidity and 24h volume. Use get_pricing instead for what WattCoin services cost. No auth needed; read-only, never trades or moves funds, and the price feed is cached for about 60 seconds. Returns JSON. Not financial advice; liquidity is thin.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_watt_token_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior, but the description adds meaningful context beyond them: no auth is needed, it never trades or moves funds, the price feed is cached for about 60 seconds, it returns JSON, and liquidity is thin. These details help the agent set expectations about freshness, safety, and risk.

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 front-loaded with the resource and returned fields, then immediately gives the alternative tool, then covers safety and caching behavior. Every sentence adds useful information, and there is no redundant restatement of the title or annotations.

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 input parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description supplies everything an agent needs: what data is returned, when to use get_pricing instead, auth requirements, caching behavior, and risk context. Nothing material is missing for correct invocation.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any schema gaps.

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 names the specific resource (WATT token reference data) and enumerates the exact fields returned: mint address, payment wallet, USD/SOL price, liquidity, and 24h volume. It also explicitly distinguishes this tool from get_pricing, so an agent can identify its role without opening the schema.

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?

It gives an explicit alternative: use get_pricing instead for what WattCoin services cost. That directly tells the agent when not to use this tool and routes it to the correct sibling for pricing-service questions.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.