SiteCheck Agent Intel & Dev

Large transfers on Ethereum in the latest 1 to 10 blocks

agent_intel_whale_transaction_monitor

Read-only

Large transfers on Ethereum in the latest 1 to 10 blocks (default 5, about one minute of chain time): native ETH transfers valued at the current ETH price, and USDT and USDC token transfers, each at least a USD threshold (default $100,000), with asset, amount, USD value, hash, block, sender and recipient. Ethereum only; other tokens are not included; a snapshot, not a live stream. Related tools on this server, for a different need: agent_intel_anti_whale_limit_detector when you need Static search of a VERIFIED Ethereum contract's Solidity; agent_intel_subdomain_takeover_monitor when you need Subdomain takeover check: lists up to 10 subdomains seen. Price: $0.003 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": "agent_intel_whale_transaction_monitor"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`assets`	No	Comma list of eth, usdt, usdc (default all three)
`blocks`	No	Latest blocks to scan, 1 to 10 (default 5)
`minUsd`	No	Minimum USD value, 1000 to 100000000 (default 100000)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`count`	No
`assets`	No
`blocks`	No
`minUsd`	No
`source`	No
`scanned`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`transfers`	No
`ethPriceUsd`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds real context beyond them: the call is a point-in-time snapshot rather than a stream, and pricing is $0.003 in USDC per successful call via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc with failed calls uncharged. It does not disclose latency, data-source freshness, or rate limits, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 purpose, scope and defaults are front-loaded in a single dense sentence, and the pricing note earns its place. The middle 'Related tools on this server' clause spends words pointing at two largely unrelated tools (Solidity search, subdomain takeover), which is the only real padding.

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 annotations, a 100%-covered three-parameter schema and an output schema, the description still covers everything an agent needs: asset scope, block window and threshold defaults, snapshot semantics, and the payment model. Nothing required to call it correctly 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 all three parameters already document their formats, ranges and defaults, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only adds the interpretation that 5 blocks is 'about one minute of chain time' and that the default threshold is $100,000, which is marginal extra meaning rather than new semantics.

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 opening clause names the specific verb and resource (large transfers on Ethereum, latest 1-10 blocks) and enumerates exactly what counts: native ETH, USDT and USDC above a USD threshold. It also lists the returned fields (asset, amount, USD value, hash, block, sender, recipient), so an agent can distinguish this from the many other on-chain analytics siblings 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 Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It states clear boundaries: 'Ethereum only; other tokens are not included' and 'a snapshot, not a live stream', which are exactly the when-not conditions an agent needs. It also explicitly names two alternatives ('for a different need'), though neither is a genuine competing tool for whale-transfer data, so the routing value is weaker than the exclusions.

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?