Skip to main content
Glama

TokenBank — tokenized real-world assets

by world.tokenbank
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Compare tokens on one security

compare_tokenized_access
Read-onlyIdempotent

For a security tokenized by more than one issuer, compare every token on it side by side — issuer, structure, KYC gates, custody, chain, and the target/area each issuer states — plus every Hyperliquid perpetual on it (fees, funding, leverage; no ownership). The right tool for "which tokenized versions of Apple exist?" and "where can I get NVIDIA on-chain, and at what cost?": the tokens and perps share a price driver and differ in almost everything else. Securities that exist on-chain only as a perp are included too. Hundreds of securities here are tokenized more than once — Apple exists as seven separate tokens; the response carries the exact counts, do not quote a figure from this description. targetArea describes who each issuer aims the product at and where; it is not an eligibility check — who may buy is set by the issuer. Omit query to list every such security.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results (default 10)
queryNoCompany name, underlying ticker or ISIN — e.g. "Apple", "AAPL", "US0378331005". Omit to list all.
offsetNoSkip this many matches before returning. Use the nextOffset from the previous answer to walk the whole set; its absence means you reached the end.
sectorNoOnly securities in this sector, e.g. "crypto" or "funds".
industryNoOnly securities in this industry, e.g. "bitcoin-miners", "semiconductors", "memory-storage".

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
matchedYes
nextOffsetNoPass as offset to fetch the next page; absent when there is no more
underlyingsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / industry / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "semiconductors",
-  "semiconductor-equipment",
-  "memory-storage",
-  "software",
-  "cybersecurity",
-  "ai-cloud",
-  "ai-models",
-  "hardware",
-  "networking",
-  "electronic-components",
-  "quantum",
-  "it-services",
-  "internet-platforms",
-  "media-entertainment",
-  "telecom",
-  "ecommerce",
-  "autos-ev",
-  "retail",
-  "restaurants",
-  "consumer-staples",
-  "leisure-apparel",
-  "pharma-biotech",
-  "medtech",
-  "health-services",
-  "banks",
-  "payments",
-  "brokers-exchanges",
-  "asset-managers",
-  "insurance",
-  "financial-data",
-  "bitcoin-miners",
-  "crypto-treasury",
-  "crypto-platforms",
-  "aerospace-defense",
-  "space",
-  "machinery-electrical",
-  "transport-logistics",
-  "construction-engineering",
-  "business-services",
-  "oil-gas",
-  "utilities-power",
-  "nuclear-uranium",
-  "clean-energy",
-  "metals-mining",
-  "chemicals-materials",
-  "reits",
-  "real-estate-services",
-  "index-etf",
-  "country-etf",
-  "thematic-etf",
-  "leveraged-etf",
-  "bond-etf",
-  "commodity-etp",
-  "crypto-etp"
-]New value: +[
+  "semiconductors",
+  "semiconductor-equipment",
+  "memory-storage",
+  "software",
+  "cybersecurity",
+  "ai-cloud",
+  "ai-models",
+  "hardware",
+  "networking",
+  "electronic-components",
+  "quantum",
+  "it-services",
+  "internet-platforms",
+  "media-entertainment",
+  "telecom",
+  "ecommerce",
+  "autos-ev",
+  "retail",
+  "restaurants",
+  "consumer-staples",
+  "leisure-apparel",
+  "pharma-biotech",
+  "medtech",
+  "health-services",
+  "banks",
+  "payments",
+  "brokers-exchanges",
+  "asset-managers",
+  "insurance",
+  "financial-data",
+  "bdc-private-credit",
+  "bitcoin-miners",
+  "crypto-treasury",
+  "crypto-platforms",
+  "aerospace-defense",
+  "space",
+  "machinery-electrical",
+  "transport-logistics",
+  "construction-engineering",
+  "business-services",
+  "oil-gas",
+  "utilities-power",
+  "nuclear-uranium",
+  "clean-energy",
+  "metals-mining",
+  "chemicals-materials",
+  "reits",
+  "real-estate-services",
+  "index-etf",
+  "country-etf",
+  "thematic-etf",
+  "leveraged-etf",
+  "bond-etf",
+  "commodity-etp",
+  "crypto-etp"
+]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / industry
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only securities in this industry, e.g. \"bitcoin-miners\", \"semiconductors\", \"memory-storage\".",
+  "enum": [
+    "semiconductors",
+    "semiconductor-equipment",
+    "memory-storage",
+    "software",
+    "cybersecurity",
+    "ai-cloud",
+    "ai-models",
+    "hardware",
+    "networking",
+    "electronic-components",
+    "quantum",
+    "it-services",
+    "internet-platforms",
+    "media-entertainment",
+    "telecom",
+    "ecommerce",
+    "autos-ev",
+    "retail",
+    "restaurants",
+    "consumer-staples",
+    "leisure-apparel",
+    "pharma-biotech",
+    "medtech",
+    "health-services",
+    "banks",
+    "payments",
+    "brokers-exchanges",
+    "asset-managers",
+    "insurance",
+    "financial-data",
+    "bitcoin-miners",
+    "crypto-treasury",
+    "crypto-platforms",
+    "aerospace-defense",
+    "space",
+    "machinery-electrical",
+    "transport-logistics",
+    "construction-engineering",
+    "business-services",
+    "oil-gas",
+    "utilities-power",
+    "nuclear-uranium",
+    "clean-energy",
+    "metals-mining",
+    "chemicals-materials",
+    "reits",
+    "real-estate-services",
+    "index-etf",
+    "country-etf",
+    "thematic-etf",
+    "leveraged-etf",
+    "bond-etf",
+    "commodity-etp",
+    "crypto-etp"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / sector
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only securities in this sector, e.g. \"crypto\" or \"funds\".",
+  "enum": [
+    "technology",
+    "communication",
+    "consumer",
+    "healthcare",
+    "financials",
+    "crypto",
+    "industrials",
+    "energy",
+    "materials",
+    "real-estate",
+    "funds"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / reach
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Only underlyings with at least one instrument of this reach. Use \"retail\" to find what a normal EU investor can buy.",
-  "enum": [
-    "retail",
-    "professional",
-    "closed",
-    "unknown"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / split_only
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Only securities where the reach DIFFERS between their tokens — i.e. the company is buyable, but not through every token on it. Default false.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), yet the description still adds real value: it enumerates the response fields, clarifies that perps carry 'no ownership', warns that targetArea is not an eligibility check, and states counts come from the response rather than the prose.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: the core purpose and use cases lead, with caveats trailing. It is on the long side and the 'do not quote a figure from this description' meta-instruction adds bulk, but nearly every sentence carries routing or behavioral information.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description need not restate return structure, yet it still clarifies semantics an agent would otherwise guess at (perps lack ownership, targetArea is not eligibility). Nothing needed to call it correctly 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents limit, offset, sector, industry and query format. The description only reinforces 'omit `query` to list every such security', adding marginal meaning beyond the structured fields — the baseline 3 when schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Names a specific verb (compare) and a precise resource (every token issued on a single security, plus its Hyperliquid perps), and distinguishes itself from siblings like compare_assets and find_tokenized_security by scoping to one underlying. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

Gives concrete routing examples ('which tokenized versions of Apple exist?', 'where can I get NVIDIA on-chain, and at what cost?') and states that omitting `query` lists everything. It never names a sibling alternative or a when-not condition, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All TokenBank — tokenized real-world assets 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