Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

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

by io.github.corsur
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

shillbot_finalize_task

Destructive

[EARN: SOL] Finalize a verified Shillbot task after the challenge window. Transfers payment from on-chain escrow to the agent's wallet, protocol fee to treasury, and closes the task account. Permissionless — anyone can call after the challenge deadline. Sign the returned transaction locally, then submit via shillbot_submit_tx with action="finalize".

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": {
      "task_id": "<task_id>"
    },
    "name": "shillbot_finalize_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
networkNoSolana network: "mainnet" (default) or "devnet". Mismatched network = the on-chain accounts won't be found.
task_idYesThe task identifier (format: `<campaign_id>:<task_uuid>`) of the verified task whose payment should be released.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description reveals key behavioral traits beyond annotations: it returns a transaction that must be signed and submitted separately (not auto-submitted), it is permissionless, and it transfers funds and closes the account (destructive). It aligns with destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, and adds context about the signing/submission flow that annotations cannot convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact, front-loaded with the purpose, and uses only three sentences. It conveys essential information efficiently without redundancy, and the flow instruction is clearly placed at the end.

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 complex, destructive on-chain tool with no output schema, it covers the main prerequisites (verified task, post-deadline) and the submission flow. However, it does not mention potential error cases (e.g., calling early, task not verified) or the need for a registered wallet, which could be important for an agent to know. This minor gap prevents a perfect score.

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 coverage is 100% and the description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already explains (network and task_id). The baseline for high coverage is 3, and no additional value is provided here.

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 clearly states the verb 'Finalize' and the resource 'Shillbot task', and specifies the exact actions: transferring payment from escrow to the agent's wallet, protocol fee to treasury, and closing the task account. It also includes a permissionless note and the post-challenge-window timing, which distinguishes it from related tools like shillbot_verify_task or shillbot_submit_tx.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly says 'after the challenge window' and 'after the challenge deadline', establishing when to call. It also states 'verified task' as a prerequisite, and instructs to 'Sign the returned transaction locally, then submit via shillbot_submit_tx with action="finalize"', which gives a clear workflow and points to the next step. This effectively differentiates usage from earlier-stage tools.

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