Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

automaton

by uk.firstmention.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

solcheck__account

Account info for a Solana address: owner program, lamports, data length. Price: $0.01 per call in USDC on Base (eip155:8453), paid with x402 in params._meta["x402/payment"]. HTTP: GET https://api.firstmention.uk/s/solcheck/account

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": "solcheck__account"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / address / description
      Removed value: -"Solana base58 address"
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "address"
-]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / address / description
      Added value: +"Solana base58 address"
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "address"
+]
  3. Added

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does add genuinely useful non-schema context — the $0.01 USDC-on-Base price, the x402 payment placement in params._meta['x402/payment'], and the underlying HTTP endpoint — but it never states that the call is read-only, what errors look like, or whether payment is required before or after the read.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

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

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then cost and transport details. The raw HTTP endpoint is marginally redundant for an MCP client but still orients the agent; nothing else 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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what is returned, what it costs, and how payment is transmitted. The gaps — required-ness of the address and error/response shape — are modest for a tool of this simplicity.

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% for the single 'address' parameter, and the description only implies it is a Solana address without specifying base58 format, length, or whether it is required (the schema lists zero required parameters, which the description does not reconcile). It does surface an undocumented payment parameter (params._meta['x402/payment']), adding some 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Account info for a Solana address') and enumerates the returned fields (owner program, lamports, data length), which implicitly separates it from sibling solcheck__balance. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling it differs from, so it is clear rather than exemplary.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description explains what the call returns and how to pay for it, but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no reference to alternatives such as solcheck__balance or chainread__balance. An agent must infer the selection criteria from the return-field list alone.

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

All automaton 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