A
licenseB
qualityD
maintenanceEnables Claude to interact with Ethereum nodes, allowing users to check ENS token balances, view smart contract code, and decode transactions through natural language.
5
1
MIT
ethereum-tools
by 0xGval
Claude MCP 的以太坊工具
使用模型上下文协议 (MCP) 直接在 Claude AI 内进行以太坊区块链分析的综合工具包。
特征
智能合约审计：分析合约的安全问题、验证源代码并检测代币标准
钱包分析：检查 ETH 余额、代币持有量和交易历史记录
盈利能力跟踪：计算代币和交易的钱包利润/损失
区块链数据：使用简单命令获取和分析链上数据
代币分析：获取全面的代币详细信息、价格历史和交易模式
Related MCP server: Base MCP Server
安装
先决条件
Node.js v16+
克劳德桌面版
免费 API 密钥：
Etherscan——用于合同验证和分析
Moralis - 用于钱包盈利能力和代币余额
Codex - 用于代币价格历史和高级分析
（可选）RPC 提供商（例如Infura）或使用免费的公共端点
设置步骤
克隆此存储库：
git clone https://github.com/giovannialbero1992/ethereum-tools-mcp cd ethereum-tools-mcp安装依赖项：
npm install创建您的配置：
将
mcp.json.example复制到mcp.json编辑
mcp.json以包含您的 API 密钥和正确的文件路径
{ "mcpServers": { "ethereum-tools": { "command": "node", "args": ["YOUR_ABSOLUTE_PATH_TO/main.js"], "env": { "ETH_RPC_URL": "https://eth.llamarpc.com", "MORALIS_API_KEY": "your_moralis_api_key", "ETHERSCAN_API_KEY": "your_etherscan_api_key", "CODEX_API_KEY": "your_codex_api_key" } } } }配置 Claude 桌面版：
在 Windows 上：创建/编辑
%APPDATA%\Claude\claude_desktop_config.json将
mcp.json文件的内容复制到此配置中
可用工具
合同分析
auditContract(address: "0x...")：对智能合约进行安全审计
余额和代币
getEthBalance(address: "0x..."): 获取ETH余额getTransactionCount(address: "0x...")：获取交易计数（随机数）getTokensBalance(address: "0x...", chain: "eth", excludeSpam: true)：获取所有代币余额
盈利能力
getWalletPnl(address: "0x...", chain: "eth"): 分析钱包盈亏
代币分析
getTokenInfo(address: "0x...", networkId: 1)：获取基本代币信息，包括名称、符号和供应量getTokenPriceHistory(address: "0x...", networkId: 1, days: 7, resolution: "1D")：获取历史价格数据analyzeToken(address: "0x...", networkId: 1, days: 30)：执行全面的代币分析，包括波动性和交易模式
公用事业
add(a: 1, b: 2)：简单实用函数示例
故障排除
常见问题：
未找到环境变量：请确保您的 API 密钥在
mcp.json中正确设置提供商错误：检查您的 ETH_RPC_URL 是否有效且可访问
路径错误：确保您使用完整的绝对路径，并在 Windows 中正确转义（
\\）Codex API 问题：验证您的 Codex API 密钥是否有效并有权访问令牌数据
发展
要添加新工具：
在
tools/目录中创建或修改文件在
main.js中注册你的工具重新启动 Claude for Desktop 即可看到更改
执照
该项目已获得 MIT 许可。
致谢
Anthropic 的模型上下文协议 (MCP)
Available Tools
11 toolsaddD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| a | Yes | ||
| b | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
analyzeTokenD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes | ||
| networkId | No | Network ID (1 for Ethereum, 101 for Solana) | |
| days | No | Number of days to analyze |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
auditContractD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes | ||
| chain | No | eth |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
getEthBalanceD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
getTokenInfoD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes | ||
| networkId | No | Network ID (1 for Ethereum, 101 for Solana) |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
getTokenPriceHistoryD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes | ||
| networkId | No | Network ID (1 for Ethereum, 101 for Solana) | |
| days | No | Number of days of history | |
| resolution | No | Time resolution (e.g. 1D, 1H, 60) | 1D |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
getTokensBalanceD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes | ||
| chain | No | eth | |
| excludeSpam | No |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
getTransactionCountD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
getWalletPnlD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes | ||
| chain | No | eth |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
searchTwitterD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | ||
| section | No | latest | |
| limit | No | ||
| min_retweets | No | ||
| min_likes | No | ||
| min_replies | No | ||
| start_date | No | ||
| end_date | No | ||
| language | No |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
twitterSearchHelpD
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| topic | No | general |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
11 tool updates
- First observed
add - First observed
analyzeToken - First observed
auditContract - First observed
getEthBalance - First observed
getTokenInfo - First observed
getTokenPriceHistory - First observed
getTokensBalance - First observed
getTransactionCount - First observed
getWalletPnl - First observed
searchTwitter - First observed
twitterSearchHelp
TDQS
D1.6/5.0
Scored across 11 tools
Disambiguation3/5
Most tools have distinct purposes targeting different Ethereum-related functions like balances, token analysis, and contract auditing, but there is some overlap between 'searchTwitter' and 'twitterSearchHelp' which could cause confusion. The lack of descriptions exacerbates potential ambiguity for tools like 'add' which has no clear domain context.
Naming Consistency2/5
Naming is inconsistent with a mix of camelCase ('analyzeToken', 'getEthBalance') and snake_case ('get_token_info' implied but not used), and vague verbs like 'add' without a clear pattern. While some tools follow a 'getX' structure, the overall convention is mixed and lacks predictability.
Tool Count4/5
With 11 tools, the count is reasonable for an Ethereum-focused server, covering areas like wallet management, token analysis, and social media search. It's slightly high but well within typical bounds for such a domain without feeling overly heavy or thin.
Completeness3/5
The tool set covers key Ethereum operations like balance checks, token info, and contract auditing, but has notable gaps such as transaction sending, smart contract interaction beyond auditing, and wallet creation. The inclusion of Twitter search tools feels tangential and incomplete for core blockchain functionality.
Maintenance
ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues
Related MCP Connectors
Claude-ready DeFi MCP — risk-scored yields, profit sims & whale tracking across 86 blockchains
Claude-powered AI tools: research, write, code, analyze, translate, debate, pitch, score, and more.
Blockchain analytics API for AI agents. Smart Money signals, wallet profiling, token analytics.
Blockchain analytics API for AI agents. Smart Money signals, wallet profiling, token analytics.
Related MCP Servers
Base MCP Serverofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityFmaintenanceProvides onchain tools for Claude AI to interact with the Base blockchain and Coinbase API, enabling wallet management, fund transfers, and smart contract deployment.148 npm350MIT- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceProvides Claude with access to Ethereum and EVM-compatible blockchain operations, enabling wallet management, transaction handling, contract interactions, and blockchain queries through natural language.43558 npm10MIT
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA local Ethereum contract analysis tool that retrieves on-chain information, integrates Etherscan and RPC data, and automatically executes view functions to provide comprehensive contract insights.23-