Axiom Works AgentReader

chain_live_balance

Live wallet balance — native ETH/POL plus up to 20 caller-supplied ERC20 tokens in one RPC batch (balanceOf + decimals + symbol). No hardcoded majors (use /wallet $0.003 for USDC/USDT/DAI/WETH pack). Example: {address:"0xd8dA…6045", tokens:"0xdAC1…1ec7,0xA0b8…eB48", chain:"ethereum"}. $0.002 USDC. Related: Native + majors pack: /wallet $0.003; single ERC20: /chain/erc20-balance $0.001; native only: /chain/balance $0.001.

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": "chain_live_balance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain`	No
`tokens`	No
`wallet`	No
`address`	Yes
`network`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 6, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / wallet
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
AddedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does real work: it discloses the 20-token cap, that lookups run as one batched RPC (balanceOf + decimals + symbol, implying the return shape), and the $0.002 USDC cost. It does not state default chain behavior, what happens on an invalid address, or failure modes, which keeps it below a 5.

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 core capability and pricing are front-loaded in the first two sentences, with alternatives grouped at the end under 'Related:'. It is dense but mostly earns its place; the $0.003 wallet-pack price is repeated in both the exclusion note and the related list, which is minor redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 5-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, cost, batch limit, and alternatives well. It is incomplete on the two unexplained parameters (wallet, network) and on default network behavior, which an agent would need 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 coverage is 0% and there are 5 parameters, so the description must compensate. The example usefully shows the comma-separated 'tokens' format and a 'chain' value ('ethereum'), adding meaning beyond the bare string types. However, 'wallet' and 'network' are never explained, and their relationship to 'address' and 'chain' is left ambiguous — a meaningful gap.

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 a specific verb+resource ('Live wallet balance') and immediately scopes it: native ETH/POL plus up to 20 caller-supplied ERC20 tokens in one RPC batch. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming the exact alternatives (chain_balance, chain_erc20_balance, wallet_balances) and what each covers, so an agent can separate this tool from the rest without opening a schema.

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 what this tool does NOT do ('No hardcoded majors') and routes that case to /wallet $0.003, then lists when to use the sibling paths for a single ERC20 or native-only balance. The conditions that select each alternative are stated directly rather than left to inference.

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

All Axiom Works AgentReader 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.