Skip to main content
Glama

FabTally Chain

by io.github.zvmzaretsky

Next token vesting/unlock event(s) (paid $0.003)

token_unlocks

PAID $0.003 (x402, USDC on Base). Next token vesting/unlock event(s) from DefiLlama's PUBLIC emissions dataset: upcoming unlock date(s), token amount, and % of max supply, with a human description. Cleanly says so when a token has no public unlock schedule. Read-only, descriptive — NOT a price signal. Args: token (symbol, protocol name, or contract address), chain (optional, for address lookup). Without payment returns the x402 challenge; pass x_payment to settle.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainNoChain of the contract address (only used when token is an address).
tokenYesToken symbol (e.g. ARB), protocol name (e.g. arbitrum), or contract address.
x_paymentNox402 payment payload (base64) for this PAID read. 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. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the payment requirement ($0.003 via x402/USDC on Base), the challenge/response flow (x_payment to settle), read-only nature, and the behavior of clearly stating when a token has no public unlock schedule. This is rich behavioral disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the paid cost and structured into three sentences. It is somewhat dense but every phrase adds value, covering purpose, output, payment, and argument hints without 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 no output schema, the description explains what the tool returns (date, amount, % supply, human description) and covers edge cases (no public schedule) and payment mechanics. This is complete enough for a simple read-only lookup tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description largely repeats schema information (token can be symbol/protocol/address, chain only for address lookup, x_payment omitted to get challenge). It adds minor context about USDC on Base but no new 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 states the tool returns next token vesting/unlock event(s) with date, amount, and % of max supply from DefiLlama's public emissions dataset. This distinguishes it from sibling tools (ens_expiry, gas, oracle_health), which cover different domains.

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 provides clear context: it is a read-only, descriptive unlock-event lookup and explicitly says it is NOT a price signal. It does not name alternative tools, but the sibling tools are topically distinct, so usage context is evident.

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

All FabTally Chain toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct on-chain data category: ENS expiry, gas fees, oracle health, and token unlocks. There is no overlap in purpose or arguments, making selection unambiguous.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case format with descriptive nouns (ens_expiry, gas, oracle_health, token_unlocks). No mixed conventions or vague verbs are present.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools is a well-scoped size for a focused read-only blockchain data server. Each tool provides a distinct service without redundancy or unnecessary bloat.

Completeness4/5

The set covers common on-chain data needs (ENS, gas, oracles, token emissions), but could be more comprehensive by including e.g. block/transaction info or token balances. However, within its apparent niche it is reasonably complete.

Resources