Skip to main content
Glama

DeFade — Multi-Chain Memecoin Analyzer

by org.defade
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Funding provenance

get_funding_sources
Read-onlyIdempotent

Multi-hop tracing of where the money behind this token's key wallets actually came from, walking each funding chain back and tiering the source by whether it is a KYC'd exchange. Use it to test whether several "unrelated" holders share one funding source. It answers provenance only — money in, one dimension: it does not build the wallet-to-wallet transfer graph (get_wallet_links), group look-alike behaviour (get_lookalike_clusters), or match shared bot fee settings (get_fee_fingerprint). Read coveragePct before the origins: it is the share of supply that could be attributed, the remainder (unknownCount wallets) could not be traced and is not evidence either way, and dexPct and bridgedPct are real states rather than attributions. Results are cached for 30 minutes (computedAt, fromCache). Not for the creator's own activity (get_dev_tracker) or launch-window buying (get_launch_bundles, get_launch_snipers). Arguments: address and chain — a 0x address needs its chain; on an EVM chain this call costs 5 API units instead of 1, because the trace runs against paid indexers, so check get_usage before running it across many tokens.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainNoChain the token is deployed on: solana (default), ethereum, base, robinhood. Required for any 0x address, because the same contract address can exist on several EVM chains. Omit it for Solana. An unsupported value is rejected before any request is spent; EVM chains need a key on an All-Chains plan.solana
addressYesThe token's own contract address, exactly as an explorer shows it. Solana: the base58 mint, 32-44 characters (e.g. 6p6xgHyF7AeE6TZkSmFsko444wqoP15icUSqi2jfGiPN). EVM: 0x followed by 40 hex characters, case-insensitive (e.g. 0x6982508145454ce325ddbe47a25d4ec3d2311933). Never a pool, pair, wallet or deployer address — those come back as not found. Set `chain` to match the address: a 0x address alone cannot say which EVM chain it lives on, and a Solana mint sent with an EVM chain is rejected.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
riskNoVerdict with label and severity.
tiersNoThe same supply grouped by certainty tier, as { tier, share }.
tokenNoThe address that was scanned (on get_token_scan, the full token metadata object instead).
originsNoWhere holder supply was funded from, as { name, share }, biggest first.
poweredByNoAlways "DeFade.org".
timestampNoISO time the response was assembled.
computedAtNoWhen this was computed; fromCache says whether it was served from a stored result.
coveragePctNoShare of supply attributed to an origin; dexPct and bridgedPct are real states but not attribution.
walletCountNoWallets resolved, with resolvedCount and unknownCount.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / computedAt / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / coveragePct / type
      Previous value: -"number"New value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / origins / type
      Previous value: -"array"New value: +[
+  "array",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / poweredBy / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / risk / type
      Previous value: -"object"New value: +[
+  "object",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / tiers / type
      Previous value: -"array"New value: +[
+  "array",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / timestamp / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / walletCount / type
      Previous value: -"number"New value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral details: results are cached for 30 minutes with computedAt/fromCache, coveragePct indicates attribution share, unknownCount wallets are not evidence, and dexPct/bridgedPct are real states. No contradictions with 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?

Despite being verbose, every sentence carries distinct, useful information: purpose, exclusions, coverage semantics, caching, cost, and parameter details. The structure flows logically from what it does, to when to use, to parameter requirements, to operational notes. 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?

With an output schema present, the description still covers important context: attribution semantics, caching behavior, cost implications, and edge cases like address/chain mismatches. It provides enough detail for an agent to decide when and how to invoke, and what to expect, without needing external documentation.

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?

Schema descriptions cover the address format, chain enum, and defaults. The description adds crucial nuances: 0x addresses need chain because they can exist on multiple EVM chains, unsupported chains are rejected before spending, EVM chains require an All-Chains plan, and invalid address types (pool, wallet) return not found. This enhances the schema meaningfully.

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 traces funding origins multi-hop, tiers sources by KYC'd exchange, and answers provenance questions. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings like get_wallet_links, get_lookalike_clusters, and get_fee_fingerprint, making its unique 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?

It explicitly states when to use (testing shared funding sources) and when not to use (not for creator's own activity or launch-window buying), naming alternative tools. It also provides cost guidance and a recommendation to check get_usage before bulk use, giving clear actionable guidance.

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

All DeFade — Multi-Chain Memecoin Analyzer 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