Get reward settlement statistics for supported reward rails. Returns the current BTC price used for reward calculations, sats-per-receipt rate, reported Lightning Network payouts, total sats claimed by users, and wallets with balance. This endpoint reports settlement metrics; it is not a chain-finality or payout-proof verifier.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses that the tool returns settlement metrics and is not a verifier, but does not mention rate limits, authentication, or data freshness. Adequate but not thorough.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences: purpose, detailed output list, a caveat. Front-loaded, no wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
No output schema, no annotations. Description covers returned fields and a key limitation. Missing context on when to use among 21 sibling tools, but otherwise complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Zero parameters, schema coverage 100%. Baseline is 4; description adds no parameter info but does not need to since none exist.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description begins with a specific verb-resource combination 'Get reward settlement statistics' and lists distinct metrics, clearly differentiating from sibling tools like get-protocol-summary or get-gmv-inclusion-proof.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Implies usage by describing output, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings. The caveat 'it is not a chain-finality or payout-proof verifier' is helpful but not a full usage guide.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
