Inspects Base EVM smart contract bytecode size, EIP-1967/UUPS proxy implementation slots, EIP-7702 delegation designators, and verified function selectors. Price: 0.010 USDC on Base or Solana.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| chain_id | No | ||
| contract_address | Yes | Smart contract address on Base (0x...) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| is_proxy | Yes | ||
| standards | No | ||
| is_contract | Yes | ||
| contract_address | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "contract_address": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "is_contract": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "is_proxy": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "standards": {
+ "items": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "contract_address",
+ "is_contract",
+ "is_proxy"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish read-only, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds important behavioral context by disclosing a price (0.010 USDC on Base or Solana), which is critical for an agent to know before invoking a paid tool. However, it omits payment mechanics, rate limits, and failure behavior when payment is insufficient.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the inspection scope and followed by the price. Every sentence carries useful information with no filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return-value details need not be explained. However, for a paid inspection tool with an undocumented chain_id parameter, the description omits payment mechanics and parameter semantics that an agent needs to invoke it correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is only 50%: contract_address is described, but chain_id is undocumented in both schema and description. The description scopes inspection to 'Base EVM' but does not explain what chain_id controls or whether values other than the default 8453 are valid, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb and resource (inspect contract bytecode/proxy/selectors) and enumerates the exact inspection outputs: bytecode size, EIP-1967/UUPS implementation slots, EIP-7702 delegation designators, and verified selectors. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like checkSmartContractHoneypot and inspectBaseToken without needing the schema.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for on-chain contract inspection but gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or sibling alternative guidance. It also mentions pricing but not payment prerequisites or conditions, leaving the agent to infer invocation context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.