Chain.Love MCP

Server Details

Hosted MCP gateway for Web3 infra discovery across 20+ networks via one endpoint.

If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.

Status: Healthy
Last Tested: 2026-09-07 06:41
Transport: Streamable HTTP
URL

Available Tools

5 tools

bind_credentials_bagBind Credentials BagAInspect

Optionally bind session-scoped downstream credentials immediately after initialize. Safe to call even when no credentials are available.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`analytics`	No	Optional analytics context. It is ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.
`credentials_bag`	No	Optional session-scoped credentials map. When omitted, the server will attempt to bind credentials from request headers such as x-chainlove-cred-github.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the call is optional, safe to call without credentials, and session-scoped, which gives some behavioral context. However, it does not explain side effects (e.g., whether existing credentials are overwritten), failure modes, or what happens after binding. The description provides moderate transparency but not a complete picture.

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 two sentences that are front-loaded with the primary purpose followed by a key safety note. Every word contributes value; there is no redundancy or fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with two optional parameters, no output schema, and a simple bind operation, the description is reasonably complete. It covers when to call (after initialize), optionality, and safety. It slightly lacks detail on consequences or return value, but these are not critical for this simple tool given the rich schema.

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% and the schema descriptions are detailed: the analytics parameter is explicitly marked as ignored and recorded for analytics, and the credentials_bag parameter explains the fallback to request headers. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate given the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb ('bind'), resource ('session-scoped downstream credentials'), and timing ('immediately after initialize'). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like discover_categories, execute, and search, which serve different purposes.

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 gives clear timing guidance ('immediately after initialize') and states it is optional ('Optionally'). It also notes that it is safe to call even without credentials, providing an exclusion for that scenario. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or contrast with other tools, but the sibling tools are clearly distinct operations.

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

discover_categoriesDiscover CategoriesAInspect

For a chosen chain, list its dynamic categories and compact category summaries. Call this after discover_networks and before search when you want deterministic retrieval.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain`	Yes	Canonical chain key from discover_networks, for example 'filecoin'
`analytics`	No	Optional analytics context. It is ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The word 'list' suggests a read-only operation, and 'deterministic retrieval' hints at stable output. However, it does not mention potential side effects, authorization requirements, error cases, or pagination, leaving some behavioral gaps. The phrase 'dynamic categories' adds context but does not fully clarify behavior.

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 a single concise sentence, immediately naming the action and resource, followed by a clear usage directive. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description gives enough context for a simple list operation: it indicates the input (chain), the output type (dynamic categories and compact summaries), and its place in the workflow. However, the lack of an output schema and any detail on return structure or limits means the agent must infer the exact shape of the 'compact category summaries.' The positioning and brevity keep it on the higher end.

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?

The schema already covers both parameters 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying that 'chain' should come from discover_networks ('after discover_networks') and frames the output, which helps the agent understand the parameter's origin and purpose. It does not add new details about the analytics parameter, but the schema description already suffices.

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 verb 'list' and the resource ('dynamic categories and compact category summaries') for a chosen chain, which is specific. It also differentiates itself from siblings by positioning it after discover_networks and before search, making its role in the workflow distinct.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this after discover_networks and before search when you want deterministic retrieval,' providing a clear sequencing instruction and a criterion for when to use it. This gives strong guidance relative to sibling tools and implies alternatives (discover_networks for networks, search for searching).

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

discover_networksDiscover NetworksAInspect

List authoritative chain/network keys available in the current release. Call this first to choose a valid chain before discover_categories or search.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`analytics`	No	Optional analytics context. It is ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It conveys that the tool is a read-only listing ('List...') and scopes it to the 'current release', but it does not mention return format, pagination, error behavior, or any prerequisites like authentication. This is adequate but not deeply 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 two sentences with no wasted words. It leads with the action ('List...') and immediately follows with usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple discovery tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides enough context to call it first and pick a valid chain. It is slightly incomplete because it does not hint at the structure of the returned keys or handle the edge case of no available chains, but it is sufficient for its simplicity.

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?

The only parameter is an optional analytics object, and the schema description covers it fully (100%), stating it is 'ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.' The tool description does not need to add anything; baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List authoritative chain/network keys available in the current release.' It clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings by explicitly naming discover_categories and search as downstream tools, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description provides explicit usage guidance: 'Call this first to choose a valid chain before discover_categories or search.' It names the alternatives and states the ordering, which is exactly what an agent needs to select the correct tool.

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

executeUnified ExecuteCInspect

Unified execution entrypoint for registry actions, saved connection management, downstream MCP connection validation, and downstream MCP runtime actions

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`analytics`	No	Optional analytics context. It is ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.
`arguments`	No	Operation-specific arguments. Preferred runtime flow uses create_connection or bind_credentials_bag, then connect_mcp, then connection_id for list_mcp_tools and call_mcp_tool
`operation`	No	Unified operation name: get_details \| open_actions \| connect_mcp \| list_connections \| create_connection \| get_connection \| update_connection_label \| delete_connection \| list_mcps \| bind_mcp_tokens \| list_mcp_tools \| call_mcp_tool
`service_id`	No	Registry service identifier. Required for service-scoped operations such as get_details, open_actions, and connect_mcp

TDQS

C2.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only discloses that the analytics parameter is ignored by execution. It does not mention that operations like delete_connection are destructive, that credentials may be required, or anything about side effects. For a tool capable of creating/deleting connections and calling MCP tools, this is a major transparency gap.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a single long sentence packed with undefined jargon ('registry actions', 'downstream MCP connection validation'). It is not front-loaded with a concrete verb or resource, and it reads as abstract obfuscation rather than concise communication.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This tool has high complexity (4 parameters, nested objects, 12 operations, no output schema, no annotations), yet the description offers only a vague high-level categorization. It omits the list of operations, required/optional parameters, expected return values, side effects, and safety implications. The schema fills some gaps, but the description is completely inadequate for an agent to safely invoke this 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides. The schema's own arguments description contains a useful preferred-flow note, but that is not part of the tool description, so no incremental value is added by the description itself.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Unified execution entrypoint for registry actions, saved connection management, downstream MCP connection validation, and downstream MCP runtime actions' is vague and generic. It lists categories of activity without naming any specific operation or indicating what the tool actually does. The 12 operation names in the schema are not referenced, and the description does not distinguish this tool from siblings like search or discover_categories.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use execute versus the sibling tools. The only usage hint appears in the schema's arguments parameter ('Preferred runtime flow uses create_connection...'), which is part of the schema, not the tool description. The description itself offers no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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

searchRegistry SearchBInspect

Search Chain.Love registry services. Prefer passing explicit chain/category from discover_networks and discover_categories, but standalone search still works without prior discovery.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tags`	No	List of tags to filter by
`chain`	No	Target chain key. Prefer passing a value returned by discover_networks
`limit`	No	Pagination limit (max 20)
`query`	No	Free-form query text
`offset`	No	Pagination offset
`filters`	No	Dynamic filter object
`category`	No	Top-level category key. Prefer passing a value returned by discover_categories
`analytics`	No	Optional analytics context. It is ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only reveals that standalone search works without prior discovery, but doesn't explain output format, pagination behavior, or whether the operation is read-only. For a search tool, this is minimal.

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 compact: two sentences, no filler. The first sentence states purpose, the second gives a significant usage caveat. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 8 parameters and no output schema, the tool is complex, yet the description provides only two sentences of general guidance. It does not explain how tags, query, filters, and pagination interact, nor what results look like. The description is inadequate for the complexity level.

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%, with all parameters already described in the input schema. The description adds no new parametric detail beyond mentioning discovery tools, which the schema already references. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool searches Chain.Love registry services, providing a specific verb ('Search') and resource. It distinguishes from sibling discovery tools by implying search operates after discovery, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'discover' tools.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: prefer passing chain/category values from discover_networks and discover_categories, but notes standalone search still works. This effectively tells the agent when to use these other tools vs. this one, though it doesn't explicitly say 'use discover_categories when you need category lists'.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

5 tool updatesAug 13, 2026

Changedbind_credentials_bag1 field changed

addedInput schema / properties / analytics

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional analytics context. It is ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.",
+  "properties": {
+    "conversation_id": {
+      "description": "Optional conversation identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "interaction_id": {
+      "description": "Optional interaction/message identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "description": "Optional analytics source identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "user_query": {
+      "description": "Original user query or prompt that led to this tool call, if available.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changeddiscover_categories1 field changed

addedInput schema / properties / analytics

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional analytics context. It is ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.",
+  "properties": {
+    "conversation_id": {
+      "description": "Optional conversation identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "interaction_id": {
+      "description": "Optional interaction/message identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "description": "Optional analytics source identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "user_query": {
+      "description": "Original user query or prompt that led to this tool call, if available.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changeddiscover_networks1 field changed

addedInput schema / properties / analytics

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional analytics context. It is ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.",
+  "properties": {
+    "conversation_id": {
+      "description": "Optional conversation identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "interaction_id": {
+      "description": "Optional interaction/message identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "description": "Optional analytics source identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "user_query": {
+      "description": "Original user query or prompt that led to this tool call, if available.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changedexecute1 field changed

addedInput schema / properties / analytics

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional analytics context. It is ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.",
+  "properties": {
+    "conversation_id": {
+      "description": "Optional conversation identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "interaction_id": {
+      "description": "Optional interaction/message identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "description": "Optional analytics source identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "user_query": {
+      "description": "Original user query or prompt that led to this tool call, if available.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changedsearch1 field changed

addedInput schema / properties / analytics

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional analytics context. It is ignored by tool execution and recorded only for usage analytics.",
+  "properties": {
+    "conversation_id": {
+      "description": "Optional conversation identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "interaction_id": {
+      "description": "Optional interaction/message identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "description": "Optional analytics source identifier.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "user_query": {
+      "description": "Original user query or prompt that led to this tool call, if available.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

5 tool updatesApr 15, 2026
- First observedbind_credentials_bag
- First observeddiscover_categories
- First observeddiscover_networks
- First observedexecute
- First observedsearch

Frequently Asked Questions

Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.

Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
- GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such as io.github.acme/server also needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.
- HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at /.well-known/glama.json on the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.
- DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.

The HTTP ownership file has this structure:

{
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
  "claim": "glama_claim_..."
}

Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.

If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.

For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Related MCP Connectors

Abstraxn Agent Layer A
io.github.sandeep-antier
Abstraxn: public Web3 MCP server for read-only chain data and pay-per-call relays.
Web3 & Decentralized Tech Blockchain
1214
Web Intel A
com.timzinin.api
8 pay-per-call web intel tools over MCP. Free discovery, calls settle in USDC on Base (x402).
Web Scraping Payments & Billing Blockchain
102
BittensorMCPOAuth
io.github.btmcp
Hosted MCP server for live Bittensor chain reads and self-custodial on-chain writes.
Blockchain Cryptocurrency Web3 & Decentralized Tech
1
mcp-server A
io.github.apihubio
Discover and pay for APIs with USDC credits. No wallet, no gas, MCP-native marketplace.
Cryptocurrency Payments & Billing
92

Related MCP Servers

thebuyside-x402-agent
Blockchain Cryptocurrency Payments & Billing
jaysperspective
A
license
A
quality
D
maintenance
The MCP gateway that lets any AI agent discover and pay metered APIs on Base or Solana — without the user wiring payments themselves.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-06-07 14:12 UTC)
3
15
1
Apache 2.0
x402 On-Chain Data MCP Server
Blockchain Cryptocurrency Web3 & Decentralized Tech
0xEtherial
F
license
A
quality
D
maintenance
Pay-per-call MCP server for on-chain blockchain data including wallet profiles, token metrics, protocol TVL, and gas prices.
Updated 6 months ago (2026-03-03 17:59 UTC)
5
-
mcp-server-insumer
Blockchain Finance Security
douglasborthwick-crypto
A
license
A
quality
A
maintenance
MCP server for on-chain attestation and wallet trust profiles across 31 EVM chains and Solana. Privacy-preserving boolean verification, ECDSA-signed responses, compliance templates.
Updated 4 days ago (2026-09-02 21:48 UTC)
27
193
1
MIT
web3agent
Blockchain Web3 & Decentralized Tech
Apegurus
A
license
C
quality
A
maintenance
Web3 MCP proxy server for AI agents: EVM execution, DeFi swaps, bridges, advanced orders, market data, wallet management, and confirmation-gated writes.
Updated 11 days ago (2026-08-27 15:15 UTC)
100
160
1
MIT

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

C2.9/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

The 'execute' tool is a catch-all for registry actions, connection management, and runtime actions, creating ambiguity about when to use it versus the more specific discover_* and search tools. The other tools are distinct, but the overlap with execute's broad scope causes confusion.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names mix bare verbs ('execute', 'search') with verb-noun patterns ('discover_categories', 'discover_networks'), plus one compound 'bind_credentials_bag'. This inconsistent style violates the predictable convention expected in a well-coherent tool set.

Tool Count4/5

Five tools is within the ideal range for a focused MCP server. The count feels reasonable, though the broad scope of 'execute' suggests it may be absorbing many operations that could be split into more distinct tools.

Completeness3/5

The server covers discovery, search, and credential binding, but the generic 'execute' tool is the only gateway to mutations and connection management. This makes the surface technically complete but poorly structured, as significant functionality is hidden inside a single opaque entrypoint.

Resources

Need Help?