Skip to main content
Glama

walletlink.social

by social.walletlink
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Resolve wallets to social identities

walletlink_resolve_wallets
Read-only

Resolve one or more Ethereum addresses to the social identities attached to them: X handle, Farcaster account, ENS name, Lens profile, GitHub account.

COST: one match credit per address that resolves to an X handle or a Farcaster account. An address that resolves to nothing is free, and so is one carrying only an ENS name, a Lens profile or a GitHub account. Up to 50 addresses per call on the default plan; a live Scale pack raises the ceiling to 200 and Index to 1000, and the API refuses over YOUR ceiling with BATCH_SIZE_EXCEEDED naming it. A batch call spends one request-unit per address of the per-minute window, and a full batch fills most of a minute on every plan: the default plan gives 60 units per minute and 50-address batches, and a live Scale or Index pack raises both. Pace multi-batch runs a minute apart and read the reset time from the quota.

Each identity reports whether the address owner attested it rather than it being correlated by a third party, and each X handle reports whether it still reaches anyone: a handle can be attested and suspended, or freed and since taken by a stranger.

Send every address you need in one call. Duplicates are removed before you are charged, but each copy still costs throughput.

A retried call bills again: duplicates are removed inside one call, never across calls, and a tool call cannot carry an idempotency key. Before resending a call that may have gone through, read the balance instead of guessing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressesYesEthereum addresses, each 0x followed by 40 hex characters. Case does not matter.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / addresses / maxItems
      Previous value: -50New value: +1000
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=false. The description adds extensive behavioral detail: billing rules per identity type, quota ceilings by plan, BATCH_SIZE_EXCEEDED error, duplicate handling inside a call, retry re-billing, attestation status, and suspended handles. No contradiction 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?

Though long, every sentence carries operational value. The text is organized into focused paragraphs: function, cost, result semantics, batching, retry behavior. The structure is front-loaded with the core purpose and follows with necessary caveats. No fluff or repetition.

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?

The description fully covers what an agent needs: input constraints, output semantics (attested vs correlated, suspended handles), cost model, rate limits, and retry implications. There is no output schema, so the description's mention of per-identity attestation and handle reachability compensates for that. Nothing critical is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the format, pattern, and min/max items are already documented. The description adds meaningful parameter-related context: duplicates are removed before charging, each copy costs throughput, and address count affects request-unit usage. This goes beyond the raw schema and helps the agent properly size the 'addresses' array.

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 starts with a specific verb ('Resolve'), identifies the resource ('one or more Ethereum addresses') and the result ('social identities attached to them: X handle, Farcaster account, ENS name, Lens profile, GitHub account'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like walletlink_account_balance or walletlink_wallets_by_x_handle by focusing on address-to-identity resolution.

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 context: send all addresses in one call, pace multi-batch runs a minute apart, read the reset time from the quota, and avoid blind retries. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the context is strong enough that an agent knows when this tool fits. Minor gap: no direct contrast with sibling tools like walletlink_wallets_by_x_handle.

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

All walletlink.social 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