Skip to main content
Glama
DHEBP

dero-mcp-server

by DHEBP
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

dero_durl_to_scid

Read-only

Resolve a TELA dURL like vault.tela directly from chain to its on-chain SCID(s), with no Gnomon indexer required. Discovers TELA apps claiming that dURL and returns newest contract, plus collision candidates.

Instructions

Composite: resolve a TELA dURL (e.g. "vault.tela") to its on-chain SCID(s) by discovering TELA apps directly from chain — no external Gnomon indexer required. TELA apps advertise a human-readable dURL; this finds the contract(s) that claim it.

When to call: when a user asks "what's the SCID for .tela", "find the TELA app called X", or gives a dURL and wants the contract. IMPORTANT routing: for a registered DERO NAME like "quickbrownfox" (no dot, not a dURL), use dero_name_to_address instead — that is a name to address lookup, not a TELA app. This tool is only for TELA dURLs (they contain a dot / .tela / a dero:// prefix).

Input Requirements:

  • durl is REQUIRED. A TELA dURL such as "vault.tela", "feed.tela", or "dero://cipherchess.tela". Case- and prefix-insensitive.

Output: { query, normalized, found, match_count, scid, primary, collision, other_candidates[], narrative, related_docs } on a hit; { query, normalized, found:false, match_count:0, hint } on a miss. dURLs are NOT unique — when multiple contracts claim one, the NEWEST is returned as scid/primary and the rest are disclosed in other_candidates with collision:true. The first call triggers a ~10s one-time discovery scan of the newest chain contracts (cached afterward). Feed the returned scid to tela_inspect to view the app.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
durlYesA TELA dURL to resolve, e.g. "vault.tela" or "dero://feed.tela". NOT a registered DERO name (use dero_name_to_address for names like "quickbrownfox").

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.6.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Addedv0.4.8

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as readOnly and non-destructive, but the description adds substantive behavioral context: the first call triggers a ~10s one-time discovery scan, results are cached, dURLs are not unique, the newest match is returned as primary, collisions are disclosed, and exact output shapes on hit and miss are described. This goes well beyond what annotations reveal.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is well-organized with clear sections and front-loaded core purpose. It is dense with valuable detail, but it slightly repeats the dero_name_to_address routing instruction in both the 'When to call' section and the Input Requirements list, making it marginally less concise than ideal.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, yet the description fully compensates by enumerating the exact output fields for both hit and miss cases, explaining collision behavior, first-call latency, caching, and how to follow up with tela_inspect. Nothing an agent needs to correctly invoke and interpret this tool is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema documents the durl parameter fully. The description adds useful semantics beyond the schema: case- and prefix-insensitivity, acceptance of 'dero://' prefixed inputs, and reinforcement that DERO names should not be passed here. This is a meaningful but not massive addition above the baseline.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('resolve'), a specific resource ('TELA dURL'), and the target ('on-chain SCID(s)'). It clearly distinguishes itself from dero_name_to_address by explaining that DERO names without dots are not TELA dURLs.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides an explicit 'When to call' section with concrete user-phrase examples, and it names the alternative tool (dero_name_to_address) with the exact routing condition. It also explicitly states what this tool is NOT for.

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