Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Agentic AQUA

Agentic AQUA

Official
by AquaWallet
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

btc_sweep

Sweep an entire Bitcoin wallet balance to one address. Deduct fees from inputs and leave zero sats, supporting send-all or empty-wallet transfers.

Instructions

Sweep the entire Bitcoin balance to one address. Fee is deducted from the inputs — leaves 0 sats in the wallet. Use this whenever the user says 'send all', 'sweep', 'drain', 'empty wallet', or 'move everything' on Bitcoin.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "wallet_name": "<wallet_name>",
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "btc_sweep"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesDestination Bitcoin address (bc1...)
fee_rateNoOptional fee rate in Sat/vB
passwordNoPassword to decrypt mnemonic (if encrypted at rest)
wallet_nameYesName of the wallet
password_fileNoPath to a local file containing the wallet password; keeps the password out of the conversation. Do not combine with password.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description does real work by disclosing that the fee comes out of the inputs and the wallet is left at zero, which tells the agent the recipient gets less than the quoted balance. It omits other material behavior for a value-destroying operation: irreversibility, whether confirmation is required, and what happens if the balance is below fee/dust.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and its consequence, then the invocation triggers. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

For a simple five-parameter action with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers what it does, the balance-consuming effect, and when to invoke it. The main residual gap is failure/edge behavior for a destructive spend, which is secondary given the rich schema.

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%, so all five parameters (including the password vs. password_file distinction) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond implying a fee is taken from inputs; baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Sweep the entire Bitcoin balance to one address') plus the defining outcome ('leaves 0 sats in the wallet'), which separates it from plain btc_send/lw_send without needing the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger list of user phrasings ('send all', 'sweep', 'drain', 'empty wallet', 'move everything') scoped to Bitcoin. It does not state the inverse case — that partial-amount sends belong to btc_send — nor any prerequisites, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools