SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

Recent stale/orphaned Bitcoin blocks and sidechain forks

crypto_btc_chain_tips

Read-only

Recent stale/orphaned Bitcoin blocks and sidechain forks via Bitcoin Core getchaintips. Returns active tip, sidechain tips with height, hash, status, branch length, and block timestamp. Related tools on this server, for a different need: crypto_btc_blocks_range when you need up to 144 consecutive Bitcoin blocks descending; crypto_btc_coin_days_destroyed when you need Bitcoin Coin Days Destroyed metric for recent days. Price: $0.005 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_btc_chain_tips"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Maximum fork tips to return (1-50, default 10)
`status`	No	Filter by fork tip status (default 'all')

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds material context beyond that: the data source (Bitcoin Core getchaintips) and the full payment model ($0.005 USDC per successful call via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc, failures not charged). It does not discuss latency, pagination, or that results mirror one node's chain view, which would matter for interpreting stale tips.

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 purpose and return shape, followed by divergence routing and pricing, with zero filler sentences. The crypto_btc_coin_days_destroyed mention is only loosely related to chain tips and is the weakest sentence in the block, but overall the text stays tight.

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?

An output schema exists and annotations cover read-only semantics, so the description need not explain return values or safety. It still covers source, scope, cost, and alternative routing, leaving only minor gaps like what 'branch length' means or how active vs. sidechain tips are ordered.

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 both parameters (limit, status with a five-value enum) are fully documented in the schema, so the description adds no parameter meaning. Baseline 3 applies since the schema carries all the 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 description names a specific resource and scope ('Recent stale/orphaned Bitcoin blocks and sidechain forks via Bitcoin Core getchaintips') and enumerates the returned fields (active tip, sidechain tips, height, hash, status, branch length, timestamp). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling block tools such as crypto_btc_block and crypto_btc_blocks_range.

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 explicitly routes two alternative needs elsewhere: crypto_btc_blocks_range for up to 144 consecutive blocks and crypto_btc_coin_days_destroyed for the CDD metric. That is real when-to-use-which-tool guidance, though it never states exclusions or prerequisites for this tool itself (e.g., that it reflects a single node's view).

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?