Skip to main content
Glama

holders

Read-onlyIdempotent

Top holders, concentration & LP lock — Top-10 holders with their %, holder count, concentration level (whale risk), and LP-lock %, from GoPlus. Lets agents judge how fairly a token is distributed before trading. No API key required. Required input: address. Priced $0.02 per call over x402 on Base; send a prepaid x-credit-token header for unlimited calls, or get 1 free call/day per tool. No wallet or API key required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesToken contract address

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoThe result payload. Shape is service-specific; every field is documented in the tool description.
serviceNoThe service id that answered.
checkedAtNoISO-8601 timestamp of when the underlying reads were taken.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / data / description
      Previous value: -"The result payload. Shape is service-specific; every field is documented in the service description above."New value: +"The result payload. Shape is service-specific; every field is documented in the tool description."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedOutput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
      -  "data"
      -]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "properties": {
      +    "checkedAt": {
      +      "description": "ISO-8601 timestamp of when the underlying reads were taken.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "data": {
      +      "description": "The result payload. Shape is service-specific; every field is documented in the service description above.",
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "service": {
      +      "description": "The service id that answered.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "data"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: data comes from GoPlus, no API key or wallet is required, calls are priced at $0.02 on x402, and there is a free daily allowance. It also discloses the exact data fields returned. 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.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core data fields and then gives the use case, which is good. However, it is somewhat repetitive: 'No API key required' appears early and then again as 'No wallet or API key required,' and 'Required input: address' repeats the schema. The pricing/auth details could be tightened without losing value.

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 is complete for a single-parameter tool: it names the source, the inputs, the outputs, the use case, and the cost/auth model. An output schema exists to specify return values, and annotations cover safety. Nothing essential for an agent to correctly invoke the tool is missing.

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%, with the single 'address' parameter already described as 'Token contract address.' The description only restates that address is required and adds no format, network, or validation details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly specifies the resource: top holders, concentration, and LP-lock for a token, with explicit data points (Top-10 holders with %, holder count, whale risk, LP-lock %). It does not use a strong verb like 'get' or 'fetch,' and it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like holder_forensics or lp_lock, but the output details make the 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 Guidelines4/5

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

The description states a clear use case: 'Lets agents judge how fairly a token is distributed before trading.' This gives context for when to invoke the tool. It doesn't name alternatives or explicitly state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5, but the pre-trade context is clear and useful.

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