Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

FabTally Safe

by io.github.zvmzaretsky
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Wallet approval-risk scan + revoke calldata (paid $0.01)

approvals

PAID $0.01 (x402, USDC on Base). Scan a wallet's ERC-20/721 approvals ranked by exposure; flags unlimited amounts, unverified/known-malicious spenders, and address-poisoning 'fake-approval revoke bait'; returns the exact revoke calldata you execute YOURSELF (never executed/broadcast by us). Without payment returns the x402 challenge; pass x_payment. Free teaser: approvals_free.

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>",
      "chain": "<chain>"
    },
    "name": "approvals"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainYesChain: ethereum | base | bsc | polygon | arbitrum | optimism.
addressYes0x wallet address to scan.
x_paymentNox402 payment payload (base64) for this PAID tool. If supplied it is forwarded as the X-PAYMENT header to settle the call and return the real result instead of a 402 challenge. Omit to get the price challenge first.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does so well: it discloses payment requirements (x402, USDC on Base), the 402 challenge response when unpaid, the fact that it never broadcasts calldata, and security caveats like 'fake-approval revoke bait'. This is exceptionally transparent.

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 dense yet compact—three sentences covering payment, functionality, flags, return value, and security. Each sentence adds distinct value, front-loaded with the paid cost and x402 context. No wasted words.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is thorough: it covers what the tool scans, what it flags, what it returns (revoke calldata), execution responsibility, payment flow, and free alternative. It's sufficiently complete for an agent to use 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal new parameter semantics beyond the schema—'pass x_payment' restates what the schema already explains. No additional insight on address/chain formats is provided.

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 it scans wallet ERC-20/721 approvals, ranks them by exposure, flags risky spenders, and returns revoke calldata. It explicitly names the free sibling 'approvals_free' for comparison, distinguishing the paid version.

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 clear payment context ('PAID $0.01', x402 mechanics) and points to 'approvals_free' as an alternative. It doesn't explicitly exclude other sibling tools like token_safety/simulate, but the paid/free distinction and execution guidance ('execute YOURSELF') give solid contextual usage rules.

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

All FabTally Safe toolsInspect
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