BlazePhoenix MCP

get_quote

Get an on-chain DEX aggregator quote (computed by the Quoter contract, not an off-chain API). Returns route, expected output, price impact and the enforced minimum. The checks object carries the Phoenix Check verdicts — priceImpact (against a 20% hard line), the on-chain Iron Law floor, and a cross-check note — with an overall verdict that fails closed (blocked/danger/caution/ok): quote these when a user asks whether a swap is safe. Add recipient to also receive signable transaction calldata.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`in`	Yes	input token — symbol (ETH, USDC, BZPX…) or 0x address
`out`	Yes	output token — symbol or 0x address
`rpc`	No	optional https RPC endpoint of YOUR OWN node — when set, the read is made through it instead of our shared pool. The service stays free either way; this simply keeps your volume off our quota (and off everyone else's).
`chain`	Yes	base \| eth \| optimism \| arbitrum \| robinhood (or a chain id)
`exact`	No	true → execution-grade re-quote (previewPlanExact, slower)
`amountIn`	Yes	input amount in the token's smallest units (wei-style integer string)
`recipient`	No	optional 0x address; when set, the response includes signable tx calldata
`deadlineSec`	No	tx deadline horizon in seconds, 10–3600 (default 120)
`slippageBps`	No	0–5000; minOut = netOut − slippage (default: the protocol floor)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / deadlineSec

Added value: +{
+  "description": "tx deadline horizon in seconds, 10–3600 (default 120)",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / exact

Added value: +{
+  "description": "true → execution-grade re-quote (previewPlanExact, slower)",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / slippageBps

Added value: +{
+  "description": "0–5000; minOut = netOut − slippage (default: the protocol floor)",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedJul 27, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / rpc

Added value: +{
+  "description": "optional https RPC endpoint of YOUR OWN node — when set, the read is made through it instead of our shared pool. The service stays free either way; this simply keeps your volume off our quota (and off everyone else's).",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedJul 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

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 delivers: it discloses the computation source (on-chain Quoter vs off-chain API), the conditional output extension ('Add recipient to also receive signable transaction calldata'), and the fails-closed verdict semantics (blocked/danger/caution/ok against a 20% hard line and Iron Law floor). 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose before any detail. The densest sentence (the checks object) earns its length because it defines verdict semantics the agent must surface to users, and no sentence 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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the return shape (route, expected output, price impact, enforced minimum, checks verdicts) and the conditional calldata behavior. It omits failure/error behavior and the practical action implied by each verdict tier, but 100% parameter coverage in the schema keeps the gap small.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds only marginal parameter meaning: it ties slippageBps to the 'enforced minimum' concept and restates recipient's calldata behavior that the schema already documents. It does not meaningfully compensate beyond that.

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 — 'Get an on-chain DEX aggregator quote' — and adds a distinguishing method detail ('computed by the Quoter contract, not an off-chain API'). It also frames its purpose as swap-safety ('quote these when a user asks whether a swap is safe'), which separates it from the sibling check_solvency even without naming it.

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 an explicit trigger condition: 'quote these when a user asks whether a swap is safe.' This is clear context for when the tool applies. It falls short of a 5 because it does not name check_solvency as the alternative nor provide when-not-to-use exclusions.

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

All BlazePhoenix MCP 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?