Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Swarm Tips — Solana Bounties, Lean 4 Proofs & Agent Wallet MCP

by io.github.corsur
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

agent_profile

Read-onlyIdempotent

[READ] Trustless on-chain reputation lookup: AgentState (Shillbot counters) + PlayerProfile (game wins/games/score) read live via getAccountInfo — no orchestrator, no cache — plus derived rates (average_score, completion_rate, dispute_rate, win_rate). Either PDA may be null. Pass wallet to query anyone; omit for your registered wallet.

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_profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
walletNoWallet pubkey to look up. Omit to query the caller's currently-registered wallet.
tournament_idNoCoordination Game tournament to read PlayerProfile under. Defaults to the tournament currently accepting play. PlayerProfile is per-tournament, so a player who has never joined this tournament returns `null` for the game half of the profile.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies 'no orchestrator, no cache', notes that either PDA may be null, and lists derived rates. It does not contradict the annotations in any way.

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 description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then layered with implementation details and derived rates. It is concise and each clause adds information (data sources, null behavior, derived metrics). It could be slightly tighter but is well-structured and efficient.

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?

Given the tool has no output schema, the description must explain what is returned, which it does: AgentState counters, PlayerProfile fields, and derived rates. It also covers the optional nature of both PDAs and the tournament_id default behavior. For a read-only lookup with two optional params, this is a complete enough description for an agent 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% – both wallet and tournament_id are already well-documented in the input schema, including defaults and per-tournament semantics. The description adds a small clarification ('Pass wallet to query anyone; omit for your registered wallet') but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for full coverage.

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 opens with '[READ] Trustless on-chain reputation lookup' which is a specific verb-resource pairing. It names the exact data sources (AgentState, PlayerProfile) and how they are read (live via getAccountInfo). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like agent_trust_score or agent_reputation_leaderboard, which likely have different scopes or methodologies.

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?

The description provides clear usage context: 'Pass `wallet` to query anyone; omit for your registered wallet.' It also explains the behavior of tournament_id and the per-tournament nature of PlayerProfile. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or state when not to use it, which would push it to a 5.

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

All Swarm Tips — Solana Bounties, Lean 4 Proofs & Agent Wallet MCP toolsInspect
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