Crypto Bot Audit + Market Data (x402 paid)

Explorer address profile

market_scout_address_profile

Read-onlyIdempotent

What a Blockscout explorer knows about an address: native balance and USD rate, whether it is a verified contract, its name, proxy implementation, ENS name, holder/token flags and the token record when the address itself is a token. Costs $0.001 USDC per call. Byte-identical to GET /market/scout-address-profile?chain=base&address=0x833589fCD6eDb6E08f4c7C32D4f71b54bdA02913.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain`	No	which Blockscout explorer to ask (default "base")
`address`	Yes	target address, 0x + 40 hex [required]

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ts`	No
`name`	No
`note`	No
`chain`	No
`found`	No
`stale`	No
`token`	No
`caveat`	No
`isScam`	No
`reason`	No
`source`	No
`address`	No
`hasLogs`	No
`hasTokens`	No
`proxyType`	No
`balanceWei`	No
`isContract`	No
`isVerified`	No
`publicTags`	No
`reputation`	No
`ensDomainName`	No
`creationStatus`	No
`creatorAddress`	No
`exchangeRateUsd`	No
`implementations`	No
`hasTokenTransfers`	No
`balanceUpdatedAtBlock`	No
`creationTransactionHash`	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": {
+    "address": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "balanceUpdatedAtBlock": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "balanceWei": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "caveat": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "chain": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "creationStatus": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "creationTransactionHash": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "creatorAddress": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "ensDomainName": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "exchangeRateUsd": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "found": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "hasLogs": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "hasTokenTransfers": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "hasTokens": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "implementations": {
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "isContract": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "isScam": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "isVerified": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "proxyType": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "publicTags": {
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "reason": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "reputation": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "stale": {
+      "type": [
+        "boolean",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "token": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "additionalProperties": {},
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "ts": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedSep 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by disclosing the $0.001 USDC cost per call and noting the request is byte-identical to a specific GET endpoint. This gives the agent practical operational expectations without contradicting the annotations.

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 opens with a clear defining statement, then lists the returned fields, and finishes with cost and endpoint identity. Every sentence earns its place, and the most important scoping information is front-loaded.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with a full output schema and safety annotations, the description is complete: it states the data source, the fields returned, the cost, and the exact HTTP endpoint. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly 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%, with both chain and address already explained, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a concrete example URL showing chain=base and a sample address, which is mildly illustrative but does not materially expand on the schema-provided parameter semantics.

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 names the resource (an address profile from Blockscout) and enumerates the specific data fields returned: native balance, USD rate, verified-contract status, name, proxy implementation, ENS name, holder/token flags, and token record. This distinguishes it from sibling market_scout_token_profile and the chain_* address tools.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The field list implies the tool is appropriate for general address-profile lookups, but it never explicitly says when to prefer this over siblings such as chain_wallet_state, chain_balances, or market_scout_token_profile. No alternatives or exclusion criteria are mentioned, so usage guidance remains inferred rather than stated.

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?