Crypto Bot Audit + Market Data (x402 paid)

Transaction hashes in a block

chain_block_txids

Read-onlyIdempotent

Every transaction hash in one block plus the count — the step between 'which block' and 'which transfers happened', without pulling full receipts. Costs $0.001 USDC per call. Chains: base, ethereum, arbitrum, bsc, polygon, optimism, avalanche. Byte-identical to GET /chain/block-txids?chain=base&block=latest.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`block`	No	block number or latest\|safe\|finalized\|earliest\|pending (default "latest")
`chain`	Yes	chain key: base, ethereum, arbitrum, bsc, polygon, optimism, avalanche [required]

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ts`	No
`note`	No
`chain`	No
`count`	No
`stale`	No
`caveat`	No
`reason`	No
`source`	No
`chainId`	No
`truncated`	No
`chainLabel`	No
`blockNumber`	No
`transactionHashes`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 25, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "blockNumber": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "caveat": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "chain": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "chainId": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "chainLabel": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "count": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "reason": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "stale": {
+      "type": [
+        "boolean",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "transactionHashes": {
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "truncated": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "ts": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedSep 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing the $0.001 USDC cost, supported chains, and exact byte-identical REST endpoint equivalence.

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 tightly written, front-loading the core purpose, then adding cost, supported chains, and endpoint equivalence. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy or 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?

For a simple two-parameter read tool with a rich output schema and full parameter coverage, the description covers all needed context: result shape, cost, chain scope, and relationship to receipt-heavy alternatives. Nothing critical is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents chain and block well. The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 what the tool returns: every transaction hash in one block plus a count. It also differentiates itself from heavier alternatives by explicitly saying it does so 'without pulling full receipts,' which separates it from siblings like chain_block_receipts.

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 gives useful context for when to use this tool: it is the intermediate step between locating a block and seeing actual transfers, and it avoids pulling full receipts. It does not name a specific sibling alternative, but the receipts reference clearly signals the trade-off against receipt-level tools.

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

All Crypto Bot Audit + Market Data (x402 paid) 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?