xswap.to

Get swap status

get_swap_status

Read-only

Current status of a swap by its id. Statuses: new, waiting (no deposit seen yet), confirming, exchanging, sending, finished, failed, refunded, verifying (paused for a check), expired.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_swap_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Swap id that create_swap returned.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations already establish safety and external-state characteristics. Beyond that, the description adds useful domain behavior by enumerating possible statuses and clarifying ambiguous ones such as waiting and verifying.

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 definition is front-loaded with the core action and then provides a compact status glossary. The status list is directly useful and no sentence is wasted.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with annotations and full schema coverage, the description covers the key behavioral context via the status list. It does not describe the response shape, but no output schema exists and the core semantics are still sufficiently clear.

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%, and the schema already explains that the id is the swap id returned by create_swap. The description only restates that lookup is by id, so it adds little parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific retrieval action and resource: current status of a swap by its id. It is clear enough to distinguish from create_swap and get_quote by function, though it does not explicitly name or contrast those siblings.

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 implied: an agent can infer this tool is used to check the state of an existing swap once it has an id. However, the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, polling advice, or alternatives to consider.

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

All xswap.to tools Inspect

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

Need Help?