XGR MCP Gateway

Search native XGR transactions for flow analysis

search_xgr_transactions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find indexed native-XGR transactions using time, value and address filters before choosing a transaction for Relation Graph or Value Flow analysis. Typical use: all native transfers in the last 24 hours above a given XGR/wei amount. Results are read-only and cursor-paginated for latest/oldest sorting.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_xgr_transactions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sort`	No	Sort order. largest is intentionally a bounded single-page picker view.
`limit`	No	Maximum number of records to return.
`cursor`	No	Cursor returned by a previous latest/oldest search.
`address`	No	Optional address that may appear on either side of the transfer.
`toAddress`	No	Optional exact recipient address.
`fromAddress`	No	Optional exact sender address.
`maxValueWei`	No	Optional maximum native XGR transfer value in wei.
`minValueWei`	No	Minimum native XGR transfer value in wei.
`toTimestamp`	No	Optional inclusive Unix-seconds upper time bound.
`fromTimestamp`	No	Optional inclusive Unix-seconds lower time bound.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	Structured result data returned by the XGR MCP gateway.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedAug 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, etc.), the description adds useful behavioral context: 'Results are read-only and cursor-paginated for latest/oldest sorting' and the 'indexed' nature of the data. This provides transparency about pagination and potential data lag without contradicting 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 is three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a typical use case and a behavioral note. Every sentence adds distinct information with no 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?

Given the output schema exists and all 10 parameters are fully described in the schema, the description appropriately focuses on purpose, use case, and pagination behavior. It is complete for a well-structured search tool with strong annotations.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description enhances parameter meaning by grouping filters ('time, value and address filters') and providing a concrete example ('all native transfers in the last 24 hours above a given XGR/wei amount') that implies how to combine fromTimestamp, minValueWei, etc. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 a specific action: 'Find indexed native-XGR transactions using time, value and address filters' and explicitly ties to Relation Graph or Value Flow analysis. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_transactions by narrowing to native-XGR and the flow-analysis use case.

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?

It provides explicit context: 'before choosing a transaction for Relation Graph or Value Flow analysis' and a 'Typical use' example. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when to use search_transactions instead), so it falls short of a 5.

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

All XGR MCP Gateway tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.