SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

Ethereum ERC-20 holder concentration from Blockscout: top

crypto_token_holder_concentration

Read-only

Ethereum ERC-20 holder concentration from Blockscout: top 100 holders' share of total supply, top 10 share, and a Gini coefficient over those 100 balances. Gini is over the sampled top holders only, not all holders. For the very largest tokens (e.g. USDT) Blockscout can be too slow for the second page of holders; the answer then covers the top 50 (holdersSampled 50, top100SharePct null) and says so in note. Ethereum mainnet only. Related tools on this server, for a different need: crypto_token_vesting_schedule when you need token emission and unlock schedule per allocation label; crypto_solana_token_extensions when you need Solana SPL mint audit from the chain: program, authorities. Price: $0.002 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": "crypto_token_holder_concentration"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`address`	Yes	ERC-20 token contract on Ethereum mainnet, 0x + 40 hex characters

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`source`	No
`symbol`	No
`address`	No
`decimals`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`topHolders`	No
`totalSupply`	No
`holdersTotal`	No
`top10SharePct`	No
`giniTopHolders`	No
`holdersSampled`	No
`top100SharePct`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: the Gini is computed over the sampled top 100, not all holders; for very large tokens like USDT the second page can time out and the result degrades to 50 holders with top100SharePct null and an explanatory note field. It also discloses the x402 pricing model ($0.002 USDC per successful call on Base/Solana/Arc, failed calls free), which an agent needs before invoking.

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?

It is front-loaded with what is computed, then caveats, then sibling routing, then price, so an agent can stop reading early. It is dense but nearly every clause carries operational value; the only mild excess is that the sibling routing names just two of a very large fleet, which reads slightly arbitrary.

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?

Given an output schema exists, the description need not document return shape, yet it still explains the key failure-mode fields (holdersSampled, top100SharePct, note). Combined with chain scope, known slow-path behavior, and payment terms, nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly is left out.

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?

There is a single required parameter whose schema description already specifies "ERC-20 token contract on Ethereum mainnet, 0x + 40 hex characters" at 100% coverage. The description does not add format, validation, or edge-case detail about that address beyond restating mainnet scope, so it sits at the baseline where the schema does the work.

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 verb (compute) and resource (ERC-20 holder concentration) and enumerates the exact metrics returned: top-100 share, top-10 share, and a Gini coefficient. It also scopes the source (Blockscout, Ethereum mainnet), which lets an agent separate it from siblings like crypto_tao_subnet_concentration or crypto_zapper_token_balances without opening either 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 gives a hard eligibility constraint ("Ethereum mainnet only") and routes two adjacent needs to named alternatives (crypto_token_vesting_schedule for emission schedules, crypto_solana_token_extensions for Solana SPL mints). What is missing is guidance for the many other token-level siblings, and no explicit "do not use when" framing beyond the mainnet restriction.

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?