wallet-tracker

get_recent_trades

Read-only

The live feed: what tracked wallets are buying and selling right now, across

every token or filtered to one. Use for "what are KOLs buying at the moment".



blockchain: solana, bnb, base, eth or rh

wallet_type: kol, smart or whale (default kol)

minutes: only trades from the last N minutes, at most 60. Leave at 0 for the

         most recent trades regardless of age.

mint: restrict to one token

limit: how many trades (default 25)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`mint`	No	Restrict the result to a single token. Leave empty for all tokens.
`limit`	No	How many entries to return. Keep it small: large results are trimmed to fit the context window anyway.
`minutes`	No	Only trades from the last N minutes, at most 60. Leave at 0 for the most recent trades regardless of age.
`blockchain`	Yes	Blockchain. One of: solana, bnb, base, eth, rh. solana has kol, smart and whale wallets; bnb, base and rh have kol and smart; eth has kol only. rh is Robinhood Chain, an Ethereum L2.
`wallet_type`	No	Wallet type. kol is a Key Opinion Leader, an influencer whose calls move markets. smart is a wallet selected for its track record. whale is a large holder, Solana only.	kol

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds context about the live feed nature and wallet/blockchain constraints, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits or result freshness beyond what is implied.

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?

The description is well-structured with a clear purpose line and a parameter list. It is concise but slightly verbose in parameter explanations. Every sentence adds value, though some schema information is repeated.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, parameters, and constraints. It is complete for a real-time filtered list tool with good annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful extra detail for parameters like wallet_type (explaining KOL, smart, whale) and blockchain (noting rh as Robinhood Chain L2), which adds value 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?

The description clearly states the tool provides a live feed of trades by tracked wallets, with a specific use case example. While it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_signals or get_wallet_history, the purpose is specific and actionable.

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 description provides an example use case ('what are KOLs buying at the moment') but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools. Usage context is implied but not fully delineated.

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

All wallet-tracker tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct function—comparing tokens vs. wallets, detecting bundles, retrieving historical vs. current signals, etc. Overlap is minimal, and descriptions clearly differentiate similar-sounding tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (compare_, detect_, get_, list_, lookup_), all in snake_case, making it easy to predict and understand the purpose of each tool.

Tool Count4/5

With 21 tools, the set is slightly above the typical 'well-scoped' range, but the breadth of functionality—covering wallet stats, tokens, signals, bundles, and comparisons across multiple blockchains—warrants the number. No tool feels redundant.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers essentially all aspects of wallet tracking: browsing, per-wallet stats/history/holdings/connections, token-level analysis, signals, bundles, leaderboards, and activity metrics. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?