Este proyecto implementa un servidor de Protocolo de Contexto de Modelo (MCP) para interactuar con plataformas de intercambio descentralizadas (DEX). Permite a los clientes compatibles con MCP (como asistentes de IA, extensiones de IDE o aplicaciones personalizadas) acceder a funcionalidades como la obtención de cotizaciones y la ejecución de swaps.
Este servidor está construido utilizando TypeScript y fastmcp .
El servidor expone las siguientes herramientas que los clientes MCP pueden utilizar:
ODOS_GET_QUOTE : Obtener una cotización para un intercambio.
Parámetros: chainId (número), sellToken (cadena), buyToken (cadena), sellAmount (cadena)
ODOS_EXECUTE_SWAP : Ejecutar un intercambio.
Parámetros: chainId (número), sellToken (cadena), buyToken (cadena), sellAmount (cadena), quote (cadena), walletProvider (cadena)
chainId : El ID de la cadena del DEX.
sellToken : El token que quieres vender.
buyToken : El token que quieres comprar.
sellAmount : la cantidad de tokens que desea vender.
quote : La cotización que obtuvo del servicio get-quote .
walletProvider : el proveedor de billetera que desea utilizar.
Related MCP server: CCXT MCP Server
Node.js (se recomienda v18 o más reciente)
pnpm (Ver https://pnpm.io/installation )
Hay algunas formas de utilizar mcp-odos :
1. Uso de pnpm dlx (recomendado para la mayoría de las configuraciones de cliente MCP):
Puede ejecutar el servidor directamente con pnpm dlx sin necesidad de una instalación global. Esta suele ser la forma más sencilla de integrarse con clientes MCP. Consulte la sección "Ejecutar el servidor con un cliente MCP" para ver ejemplos. ( pnpm dlx es el equivalente de npx en pnpm).
2. Instalación global desde npm (a través de pnpm):
Instale el paquete globalmente para que el comando mcp-odos esté disponible en todo el sistema:
pnpm add -g mcp-odos3. Construcción desde la fuente (para desarrollo o modificaciones personalizadas):
Clonar el repositorio:
git clone https://github.com/IQAIcom/mcp-odos.git
cd mcp-odosInstalar dependencias:
pnpm installConstruir el servidor: Esto compila el código TypeScript a JavaScript en el directorio dist .
pnpm run buildEl script prepare también ejecuta pnpm run build , por lo que las dependencias se crean durante la instalación si clona y ejecuta pnpm install .
Este servidor MCP puede requerir que el cliente MCP que lo ejecuta configure ciertas variables de entorno. Estas suelen configurarse en la definición del servidor MCP del cliente (por ejemplo, en un archivo mcp.json para Cursor o similar para otros clientes).
Cualquier variable de entorno necesaria para proveedores de billetera o claves API.
Los clientes MCP (como asistentes de IA, extensiones IDE, etc.) ejecutarán este servidor en segundo plano. Debe configurar el cliente para indicarle cómo iniciar el servidor.
A continuación se muestra un fragmento de configuración de ejemplo que un cliente MCP podría usar (por ejemplo, en un archivo de configuración mcp_servers.json o similar). Este ejemplo muestra cómo ejecutar el servidor usando el paquete npm publicado mediante pnpm dlx .
{
"mcpServers": {
"iq-odos-mcp-server": {
"command": "pnpm",
"args": ["dlx", "mcp-odos"],
"env": {
"WALLET_PRIVATE_KEY": "your_wallet_private_key_here"
}
}
}
}Alternativa si se instala globalmente:
Si ha instalado mcp-odos globalmente ( pnpm add -g mcp-odos ), puede simplificar el command y args :
{
"mcpServers": {
"iq-odos-mcp-server": {
"command": "mcp-odos",
"args": [],
"env": {
"WALLET_PRIVATE_KEY": "your_wallet_private_key_here"
}
}
}
}command : El ejecutable a ejecutar.
Para pnpm dlx : "pnpm" (con "dlx" como primer argumento)
Para instalación global: "mcp-odos"
args : una matriz de argumentos para pasar al comando.
Para pnpm dlx : ["dlx", "mcp-odos"]
Para instalación global: []
env : Un objeto que contiene las variables de entorno que se configurarán al iniciar el proceso del servidor. Aquí se proporcionan las variables de entorno necesarias.
workingDirectory : Generalmente no es necesario al usar el paquete publicado mediante pnpm dlx o una instalación global, ya que el paquete debería gestionar sus propias rutas correctamente. Si se ejecuta desde el código fuente ( node dist/index.js ), sería importante configurar workingDirectory en la raíz del proyecto.
Get the chain ID for a given chain name
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| chain | Yes | The chain name to get the ID for |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as idempotency, side effects, or rate limits. While the tool name suggests a read-only operation, the description does not explicitly confirm safety or other behavioral details.
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?
The description is a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb and clearly states the purpose, earning full marks for efficiency.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (single parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate but could be improved by explaining what the chain ID is or the format of the return value. It is minimally 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?
The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'chain' already described. The description adds minimal additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.
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?
The description clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'chain ID', and the condition 'for a given chain name'. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ODOS_GET_QUOTE and ODOS_SWAP, which serve different purposes.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or limitations. It is straightforward but lacks usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Get a quote for a swap or exchange operation
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| chain | No | The blockchain network to execute the transaction on. uses fraxtal as default | fraxtal |
| fromToken | Yes | The token to swap from (address). | |
| toToken | Yes | The token to swap to (address). | |
| amount | Yes | The amount of tokens to swap, in wei. | |
| prettyFormat | No | Whether to pretty format the quote. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, and the description gives no behavioral details beyond stating it gets a quote. There is no mention of side effects, authentication, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only.
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?
The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. However, it could still include more useful information without being verbose.
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?
With no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., a quote object). It does not mention the return format, pagination, or error cases, leaving the agent underinformed.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning or context for the parameters, such as token address format or amount precision.
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?
The description 'Get a quote for a swap or exchange operation' clearly states the verb (Get), resource (quote), and context (swap/exchange). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ODOS_SWAP (which performs the swap) and ODOS_GET_CHAIN_ID (which retrieves chain ID).
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings or alternatives. It does not mention that getting a quote is a prerequisite for swapping, nor does it advise against using it in certain contexts.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Execute a swap transaction
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| chain | No | The blockchain network to execute the transaction on. uses fraxtal as default | fraxtal |
| fromToken | Yes | The token to swap from (address). | |
| toToken | Yes | The token to swap to (address). | |
| amount | Yes | The amount of tokens to swap, in wei. | |
| prettyFormat | No | Whether to pretty format the quote. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. 'Execute a swap transaction' implies a write operation but does not disclose side effects, authorization needs (e.g., token approval), or error conditions, making it insufficiently transparent.
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?
The description is a single sentence, concise and front-loaded. It earns its place but could benefit from additional context without becoming verbose.
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?
Given the complexity (swap transaction with 5 parameters, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It omits critical details like expected output (transaction hash?), slippage parameters, or prerequisite approvals, leaving gaps for the agent.
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?
Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions (e.g., each token address, amount in wei). The description adds no new meaning, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate per guidelines.
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?
The description 'Execute a swap transaction' clearly states the verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like ODOS_GET_QUOTE which provides quotes. However, it lacks additional context about what a swap entails, slightly reducing clarity.
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?
No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool (e.g., after obtaining a quote) or when not to use it, leaving the agent without important context for correct invocation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0ODOS_GET_CHAIN_IDODOS_GET_QUOTEODOS_SWAPScored across 3 tools
Each tool targets a distinct step in the swap process: chain ID lookup, quote retrieval, and execution. No ambiguity or overlap exists.
All tools use a consistent ODOS_ prefix followed by clear verb_noun patterns (GET_CHAIN_ID, GET_QUOTE, SWAP), making them predictable.
With 3 tools, the server is well-scoped for the core swap workflow without unnecessary bloat or deficiency.
The tools cover the essential swap steps but lack a token approval tool, which is commonly required for many swaps, creating a potential gap.
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Multi-aggregator swap router for AI agents on Base. 10 bps fee. MCP-native, non-custodial.
A Model Context Protocol server for Wix AI tools
MCP server giving AI agents one-connection access to crypto & DeFi data: DeFi protocol TVL, stableco