SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

USDT supply changes from the USDT contract's own events

crypto_tether_treasury_burns

Read-only

USDT (Ethereum) supply changes from the USDT contract's own events over the last N blocks (1 to 200000, about 4 weeks): Tether issues (Issue), redemptions (Redeem) and destroyed funds of blacklisted addresses (DestroyedBlackFunds), with counts, totals and the latest and largest events. On-chain events only, not Tether's treasury reports. Usually answers in about 8 s, up to 19 s on slower calls; allow a 30 s timeout. 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_tether_treasury_burns"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`blocks`	No	How many latest Ethereum blocks to scan, 1 to 200000 (default 50000, about one week)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`issued`	No
`source`	No
`redeemed`	No
`tipBlock`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`fromBlock`	No
`latestEvents`	No
`blocksScanned`	No
`largestEvents`	No
`destroyedBlackFunds`	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?

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations: it discloses expected latency (~8 s, up to 19 s), recommends a 30 s timeout, states the exact price ($0.002 USDC per successful call via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc) and that failed calls are free. It also flags the data-provenance caveat that this is event-derived rather than official reporting — exactly the kind of behavioral context annotations cannot carry.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, and the operational facts (latency, cost, timeout) follow as short, scannable sentences. The opening sentence is long and packs event enumeration, range and caveat together, but no sentence is filler.

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 only one optional parameter, an output schema present, and annotations covering safety, the remaining agent-facing unknowns are cost, latency, and data provenance — all three are stated explicitly. Nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the `blocks` parameter is already documented, but the description adds real-world meaning by mapping the 1–200000 range to 'about 4 weeks' and naming the scan semantics ('over the last N blocks'). That time framing is the main thing an agent needs to choose a value and is not in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('USDT (Ethereum) supply changes from the USDT contract's own events') and enumerates exactly which event types are counted: Issue, Redeem, DestroyedBlackFunds. The scope qualifier 'On-chain events only, not Tether's treasury reports' tells an agent precisely what class of data this returns.

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?

Gives clear context for when the tool applies (measuring USDT issuance/redemption/destruction over a block window) and explicitly excludes a look-alike source (Tether treasury reports). It stops short of naming a sibling tool to use instead when the agent wants a different chain or a non-event supply metric, so guidance is clear but not a full routing rule.

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?