Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Feegate AI Agent data marketplace catalog & platform metrics

by org.feegate
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

holders.holder_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Ask "who holds this token" — full: top N holders with label, share, balance, is-contract, is-locked. ｜ 完整明细：前 N 大地址逐条列出（地址、标签、占比、余额、是否合约、是否锁仓），加合约 owner 地址与接口口径说明。参数同左。

[zh] 供应方资产「代币持仓集中度（前 10 地址占比）」按次计费 $0.03 USDC（或等值积分）。 入参：address、chain、top。 [en] Vendor asset "代币持仓集中度（前 10 地址占比）". Paid per call: $0.03 USDC (or prepaid credits). Args: address, chain, top. 付款/支付头在 MCP 请求头里带（X-Payment / X-Payment-Tx / Authorization: Bearer fg_…），不要放进参数。

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>"
    },
    "name": "holders.holder_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topNo
chainNo
addressYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and open-world behavior. The description adds genuinely non-schema behavior: per-call pricing ($0.03 USDC or credits) and the requirement that payment headers (X-Payment / X-Payment-Tx / Bearer) go in MCP request headers rather than parameters — a real invocation hazard an agent would otherwise get wrong.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: the payload description is front-loaded, then pricing, then the payment-header constraint, then args. It is long only because it is bilingual (zh/en) and includes a Chinese payload gloss, not because of padding.

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

Completeness3/5

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

No output schema exists, and the description does compensate by listing returned fields plus owner address and interface caveats. However, for a paid tool with 0% schema coverage it leaves the caller unable to determine valid chain values, the default N for top, or the address format before spending money.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description only repeats the parameter names (address, chain, top). It adds no meaning: no accepted chain identifiers, no default or maximum for top, no address format, and no indication of which parameter is required.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("who holds this token") and enumerates the returned fields (label, share, balance, is-contract, is-locked), which implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling holders.concentration that reports only an aggregate top-10 share. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so differentiation requires inference.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied by "full detail" versus the aggregation-oriented sibling; there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement. The phrase "参数同左" ("same args as on the left") is a copy-paste artifact pointing at nothing in this definition and offers no guidance.

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

All Feegate AI Agent data marketplace catalog & platform metrics 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