AgentFeed

Base wallet balance

get_base_balance

Read-onlyIdempotent

ERC20 and native ETH wallet balance on Base or Ethereum mainnet, for a 0x address or an ENS name. decimals() and symbol() are read from the contract at request time rather than assumed, because assuming 18 reports a USDC balance a trillion times too large. ENS is resolved through two independent resolvers and the answer is used only when they agree, so a wrong address can never produce a confident balance for the wrong wallet. An unsupported chain is refused rather than silently answered from the wrong one. Costs 0.002 USDC per call (x402, USDC on Solana or Base).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chain`	No	base (default) or ethereum
`token`	No	ERC20 contract address, or a known ticker: USDC, WETH, DAI, CBBTC, USDBC, CBETH, AERO, EURC. Omit for the native ETH balance
`address`	Yes	0x address (40 hex) or an ENS name ending .eth

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	the get_base_balance payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_base_balance
`tool`	Yes	the tool that produced this payload

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": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "the get_base_balance payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_base_balance",
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "const": "get_base_balance",
+      "description": "the tool that produced this payload",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "tool",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedSep 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior, and the description adds valuable behavioral details beyond that: decimals/symbol are read live from the contract to avoid magnitude errors, ENS is only trusted with two-resolver agreement, unsupported chains are refused, and the call costs 0.002 USDC. This gives an agent confidence in correctness and cost.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then each sentence adds distinct value: decimal correctness, ENS safety, chain safety, and cost. There is no filler or repetition of the title or schema.

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 three-parameter read-only tool with a full input schema and an output schema, the description covers chains, address resolution, token selection, native ETH behavior, error handling, and cost. Nothing essential is missing 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.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful semantics: omitting token returns native ETH balance, known tickers are accepted, and contract decimals are not assumed. This clarifies token behavior beyond the schema's bare descriptions.

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 first sentence identifies a specific action and resource: returning ERC20 or native ETH wallet balances for a 0x address or ENS name on Base or Ethereum mainnet. This is more specific than the title and distinguishes it from related wallet tools like get_wallet_activity or get_wallet_holdings by focusing on balance and chain scope.

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 description implies usage context through address formats, supported chains, and token options, but it never explicitly says when to choose this tool over an alternative. With a long sibling list, explicit routing would strengthen this dimension.

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

All AgentFeed 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.