SiteCheck Agent Intel & Dev

PASS / CAUTION / AVOID verdict for an EVM token from GoPlus

agent_intel_token_verdict_engine

Read-only

PASS / CAUTION / AVOID verdict for an EVM token (Base, Ethereum, BSC, Arbitrum, Polygon) from GoPlus token security (honeypot flag, buy/sell tax, open source, proxy, top holder share) and DexScreener (deepest pair liquidity, 24h volume). Rules are fixed and listed in the answer. Not financial advice; Solana is not covered. Related tools on this server, for a different need: agent_intel_token_composite_safety_score when you need Fixed-weight 0-100 safety score for an EVM token: contract; agent_intel_token_liquidity_migration_watch when you need snapshot of a token's DEX pool liquidity now. Price: $0.003 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": "agent_intel_token_verdict_engine"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain`	No	base, ethereum, bsc, arbitrum or polygon (default base)
`address`	Yes	Token contract address 0x... (40 hex characters)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`chain`	No
`rules`	No
`market`	No
`source`	No
`symbol`	No
`address`	No
`reasons`	No
`verdict`	No
`security`	No
`checkedAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), it discloses the upstream sources and the specific signals consumed, notes that the decision rules are fixed and are echoed back in the answer, and warns it is not financial advice. It also surfaces commercial behavior a caller must know: $0.003 USDC per successful call over x402 on Base/Solana/Arc, with failed calls not charged.

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 verdict and its inputs are front-loaded in the first sentence, and the cost/caveats close it. The middle sibling-routing clause is dense and slightly run-on with repeated tool names, but every sentence carries information an agent needs.

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?

For a two-parameter read-only lookup with an output schema, the definition covers everything needed: inputs, sources, supported chains, exclusions, how rules are surfaced in the response, and payment terms. No critical decision information is missing.

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% and only two parameters exist, so the schema already explains chain and the 0x address format. The description restates the supported chain names but adds no format, default, or validation nuance beyond what the schema says, so baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb (returns a PASS/CAUTION/AVOID verdict) and a specific resource (an EVM token), names the data sources behind the verdict (GoPlus honeypot/tax/ownership/holder share plus DexScreener liquidity and volume), and enumerates the supported chains. It is clearly separable from agent_intel_token_composite_safety_score and agent_intel_token_liquidity_migration_watch, which it names as different tools.

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 explicitly routes the agent: use this for a categorical verdict, use agent_intel_token_composite_safety_score for a fixed-weight 0-100 score, and use agent_intel_token_liquidity_migration_watch for a current DEX liquidity snapshot. It also states an exclusion boundary (Solana is not covered), so the agent knows when to stop.

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

All SiteCheck Agent Intel & Dev tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?