Skip to main content
Glama

wallet-tracker

by xyz.cabalspy
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

lookup_wallet

Read-only
Identify a wallet address: is it tracked, and by what name. Returns the label

CabalSpy attached to it — name, Twitter, Telegram, wallet type and chain.

Start here when a user pastes an address and asks who it is.



On EVM chains the same address can be tracked on several of them and only the

first match is returned, so the reported chain may not be the intended one.



address: the wallet address to look up

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesWallet address. Base58 on Solana, 0x-prefixed hex on the EVM chains.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / address / description
      Added value: +"Wallet address. Base58 on Solana, 0x-prefixed hex on the EVM chains."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "title": "lookup_walletDictOutput",
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / address / description
      Removed value: -"Wallet address (Solana base58 or 0x… for EVM chains)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / address / examples
      Removed value: -[
-  "G6fUXjMKPJzCY1rveAE6Qm7wy5U3vZgKDJmN1VPAdiZC"
-]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "title": "lookup_walletDictOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, indicating no side effects. The description adds useful context: it returns a label with specific attributes (name, Twitter, etc.) and warns about EVM chain behavior where the reported chain may not be the intended one. This goes beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Description is reasonably concise with a clear purpose, usage guidance, and a key caveat. However, it contains some redundancy (parameter description in both schema and description) and could be slightly more compact. Still efficient for the information it conveys.

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 tool's simplicity (1 required parameter, read-only, explicit output schema exists), the description covers essential aspects: purpose, when to use, key limitation (EVM chain behavior), and parameter details. No major gaps for an agent to correctly invoke the 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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for the 'address' parameter including format details (Base58 for Solana, 0x-prefixed hex for EVM). The description repeats the parameter name but adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states it identifies a wallet address and returns associated labels including name, Twitter, Telegram, wallet type, and chain. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_wallets and get_wallet_holdings by specifying the exact lookup action.

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?

Explicitly says 'Start here when a user pastes an address and asks who it is,' providing clear guidance on when to use it. Also warns about EVM chain behavior where only the first match is returned, which informs when results might be ambiguous. Lacks explicit mention of alternatives but is sufficiently distinct from siblings.

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

All wallet-tracker 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