Skip to main content
Glama

Prepare a Bridge to Earn task

prepare_bridge_to_earn
Read-only

Drives one Bridge to Earn task for an address from OrbitWan's own reads of the board and both chains: status (claimable, claimed, transfer_pending, transfer_complete, completed, claimed_by_other, expired, unknown), the requirements with have, need and short (null is unknown, never zero), and next, the one action to take now with its transaction already built. Loop until done: call with task_id and address, plus source_address or dest_address copied from your wallet when that chain is not EVM (Tron, Solana, Bitcoin, Cardano, XRP Ledger, Sui; never derived from the 0x address); do exactly what next.action says (fund: add what next.fund shows is short; send: sign next.tx on next.chain exactly as returned and broadcast it; wait: wait next.retry_after_seconds; done: stop; stop: report next.reason); then call again with the same inputs, plus source_tx once the bridge transaction is sent. The claim always comes first and a transfer sent before it does not count; the tool never offers a step that is not valid now, and it fetches the reward signature itself, but nothing is sent for you: every step, including the final collect on Wanchain, is a transaction you sign. Never build, retype or alter a transaction. The wanchain-bridge-to-earn skill gives the rules.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYes
task_idYes
signatureNo
source_txNo
dest_addressNo
source_addressNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / dest_address
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / source_address
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  3. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description mandates that steps involve signing and broadcasting transactions, and involves complex workflow progression. This directly contradicts the `readOnlyHint: true` and `destructiveHint: false` annotations, making the safety profile extremely misleading.

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

Conciseness1/5

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

The description is excessively verbose and dense, using technical, run-time logic instructions in a narrative format. It lacks conciseness and is overwhelming to read.

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 complexity of the task (chain hopping, internal states, manual signing), the description is exceptionally complete, providing all necessary context for a developer to understand the tool's operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

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

Since schema coverage is 0%, the description must define parameter usage, which it does exhaustively. It explains the specific requirements for parameters like `source_address` and the internal logic for `next.action`, providing deep semantic context.

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 defines its purpose: 'Drives one Bridge to Earn task for an address.' It distinguishes this from simple lookup tools by detailing the complex, iterative nature of the task.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It provides highly specific usage instructions, including the starting point (claim always comes first), loop mechanics (call with task_id and address), and specific actions based on the current state (fund, send, wait, done, stop).

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources