AgentReader

chain_proxy

Detect upgradeable proxies (EIP-1967 transparent/UUPS, beacon, legacy OZ, EIP-1167 minimal clones, EIP-7702) via eth_getStorageAt/eth_getCode: implementation, admin, beacon, and whether the implementation is a live contract. Example: {address:"0x8335…2913", chain:"base"}. $0.002 USDC.

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": "chain_proxy"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain`	No
`wallet`	No
`address`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 6, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / wallet
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the load and does well: it discloses the underlying RPC methods (eth_getStorageAt/eth_getCode), the four output facts returned (implementation, admin, beacon, liveness), and the $0.002 USDC cost. It falls short of stating read-only semantics or what happens for EOAs/non-proxy contracts.

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?

One dense sentence covering detection scope and method, followed by a compact example and price. It is front-loaded with the purpose and every element adds information an agent needs.

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 and no annotations mean the description must define return shape, which it does at a field level, but it omits the undocumented 'wallet' parameter and any listing of supported chain values or default behavior, which matters for a multi-chain tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The example clarifies 'address' format and that 'chain' takes a slug like 'base', but the third parameter 'wallet' is never mentioned or explained (presumably the paying wallet), leaving a real gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Detect upgradeable proxies') and enumerates the exact standards covered (EIP-1967 transparent/UUPS, beacon, legacy OZ, EIP-1167 clones, EIP-7702), which clearly separates it from generic siblings like chain_storage, chain_code, and contract_info.

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?

The enumerated standards imply when the tool applies, and the example shows a concrete call shape, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of chain_code, chain_storage, or contract_info, nor any statement about unsupported chains or non-contract addresses.

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

All AgentReader 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?