Skip to main content
Glama

groundtruth

by xyz.groundtruths
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

groundtruth_screen_creator

Read-onlyIdempotent

Given one creator address, return every wallet that was early in that creator's launches: the role each played (creator, repeat_buyer, one_off), how many of this creator's launches it was early in versus how many it was early in anywhere, and the creator's own rug rate against the chain baseline, because a rate without its baseline is not a finding. It does not say who owns the wallets. LIVE FIELDS, from the mint feed every 5 s: last_mint_live (unix s of the dev's newest mint), launched_live, bonded_live and mints_since_asof; ticker_asof = the newest mint the feed has seen. A row with no mints_since_asof is not live: refuse it. bonded_asof dates the recount part; peak / pull and ttr_* are history (peak_proven / pull_proven false), not a trade signal; known_bad is the census rule.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
roleNoOptional filter. Omit for all roles.
chainNoWhich chain the creator launched on.solana
limitNoMaximum wallet rows to return. The response reports wallets_truncated when it caps.
creatorYesCreator address. base58 for Solana, 0x... for Robinhood Chain.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / role / description
      Previous value: -"Optional filter. Omit for all roles. operator_pool is the row that matters most."New value: +"Optional filter. Omit for all roles."
    • changedInput schema / properties / role / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "",
-  "operator_pool",
-  "repeat_buyer",
-  "one_off"
-]New value: +[
+  "",
+  "repeat_buyer",
+  "one_off"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive). The description goes well beyond them: it discloses the 5-second live-mint feed, freshness semantics (ticker_asof, mints_since_asof), that peak/pull and ttr_* are historical rather than trade signals, and that the tool 'does not say who owns the wallets'. With no output schema, this field-level behavioral context is exactly what the description must carry.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded and most sentences carry signal, but the body is a single dense paragraph of domain jargon (ttr_*, bonded_asof, census rule) that is hard to parse, and the aside about rug rate versus baseline is editorial. Adequate but not cleanly structured.

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 a fairly complex analytic return, the description covers the returned fields, their live/historical status, truncation (schema notes wallets_truncated), and an explicit ownership caveat. It is close to complete, barring an explicit routing to the batch sibling.

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 description coverage is 100% across all four parameters, so the schema already documents role, chain, limit, and creator. The description adds little parameter-level detail (it even lists 'creator' as a role, which the schema enum does not allow as a filter), so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Given one creator address, return every wallet that was early in that creator's launches', plus the enrichment dimensions (role, early-count, rug rate vs baseline). The single-creator scope implicitly separates it from the sibling groundtruth_screen_batch, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage context is only implied by 'Given one creator address' — there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or pointer to groundtruth_screen_batch for multi-creator screening. The 'A row with no mints_since_asof is not live: refuse it' line is a useful data-handling rule but not a selection guideline.

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

All groundtruth 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