SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

Arbitrum One rollup batch postings to Ethereum L1

crypto_arbiscan_l2_rollup

Read-only

Arbitrum One rollup batch postings to Ethereum L1 and the L1 gas they incurred: the latest SequencerBatchDelivered events on the SequencerInbox with batch number, L1 block and time, data location (blob or calldata), poster, execution gas, blob gas, gas prices and fees in ETH, plus totals. Read from Ethereum mainnet via Etherscan API V2. Related tools on this server, for a different need: crypto_linea_consensys_rollup when you need Linea zkEVM rollup telemetry from the public Linea RPC. Price: $0.002 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": "crypto_arbiscan_l2_rollup"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`batches`	No	How many latest batches, 1 to 10 (default 5)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain`	No
`count`	No
`source`	No
`totals`	No
`batches`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`l1TipBlock`	No
`sequencerInbox`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only cover readOnly and openWorld; the description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: the upstream provider (Etherscan V2), the enumerated response payload, and a metered pricing model — $0.002 USDC per successful call via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc, with failed calls uncharged. That cost and billing detail materially affects invocation decisions. It does not mention rate limits, latency, or failure modes beyond the billing note.

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-loaded with the tool's subject and payload before the sibling pointer and pricing, and every sentence carries information. It is a single dense run-on with heavy comma enumeration of fields, which slightly hurts scanability.

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?

For a single-optional-param read tool with an output schema, the description covers source, scope, payload, cost, and the nearest alternative. Remaining gaps are minor environmental details (rate limits, whether an Etherscan key is needed server-side) rather than anything needed to call it correctly.

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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100% ('How many latest batches, 1 to 10 (default 5)'), so the schema fully carries the semantics. The description never refers to the batches parameter at all, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema — baseline 3.

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/resource pair — latest SequencerBatchDelivered events on the Arbitrum SequencerInbox with the enumerated fields (batch number, L1 block/time, blob vs calldata, poster, gas, fees) — and names the sibling it is not (crypto_linea_consensys_rollup). An agent can distinguish it from neighboring rollup and L2 tools 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?

States the data source (Ethereum mainnet via Etherscan API V2) and explicitly routes the agent to crypto_linea_consensys_rollup for Linea zkEVM telemetry. It does not give an explicit 'use this when' trigger or exclude overlapping cases such as crypto_optimism_superchain_tx or crypto_ethereum_gas_telemetry, so routing is clear but not fully closed.

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

All SiteCheck Crypto & Finance tools Inspect

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

Need Help?