Skip to main content
Glama

Agent.chain.tokyo Address Contracts

List authenticated owner contracts

list_contracts

List the authenticated owner's contracts. Only current active paid contracts with valid assent include their snapshotted mailbox address. Private forwarding destinations are omitted.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_contracts"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose non-obvious field-visibility rules: the snapshotted mailbox address appears only for current active paid contracts with valid assent, and private forwarding destinations are omitted. It stops short of stating auth requirements, whether inactive contracts are still returned (only that the address field is withheld), ordering, or pagination.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and scope, followed by the two conditional-visibility caveats. No redundant restatement of the name and no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must convey the return shape, and it only covers one conditional field (mailbox address) plus one omission. An agent still cannot tell whether non-active or unpaid contracts appear in the list at all, what other fields a contract carries, or how many results to expect.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline is 4–5 and nothing here misleads about inputs (the schema also enforces additionalProperties: false).

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?

Clear verb+resource with scope: lists the authenticated owner's contracts. Siblings (payments, events, locations) don't overlap, so no explicit differentiation is needed, though the description doesn't call out that it is unfiltered/tenant-scoped relative to any listing alternative.

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: a zero-parameter list means 'enumerate all my contracts', and the title says 'authenticated owner'. There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus any other retrieval path, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources