Skip to main content
Glama
DeFadeLtd

DeFade

Official
by DeFadeLtd
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Holder distribution

get_holders
Read-onlyIdempotent

View a token's true holder distribution with liquidity pools, burn addresses, lockers, exchanges, and contracts excluded. Reveals supply concentration and whether a few wallets could collapse the chart.

Instructions

Holder distribution for one token, with liquidity pools, burn addresses, lockers, exchange wallets and contracts classified out, so the top-holder list reflects actual holders. Returns the classified top holders with each wallet's supply share in a single response — no pagination. Use it to answer how concentrated the supply is and whether a few wallets could collapse the chart. Not for what large holders are doing right now (get_whales), whether holders are secretly one actor (get_wallet_links or get_lookalike_clusters), or pool depth and locks (get_liquidity). Arguments: address and chain; one API unit on any chain.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainNoChain the token is deployed on: solana (default), ethereum, base, robinhood. Required for any 0x address, because the same contract address can exist on several EVM chains. Omit it for Solana. An unsupported value is rejected before any request is spent; EVM chains need a key on an All-Chains plan.solana
addressYesThe token's own contract address, exactly as an explorer shows it. Solana: the base58 mint, 32-44 characters (e.g. 6p6xgHyF7AeE6TZkSmFsko444wqoP15icUSqi2jfGiPN). EVM: 0x followed by 40 hex characters, case-insensitive (e.g. 0x6982508145454ce325ddbe47a25d4ec3d2311933). Never a pool, pair, wallet or deployer address — those come back as not found. Set `chain` to match the address: a 0x address alone cannot say which EVM chain it lives on, and a Solana mint sent with an EVM chain is rejected.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenNoThe address that was scanned (on get_token_scan, the full token metadata object instead).
bundlesNoShallow bundle detection over the real wallets: detected, bundlePct, groups.
poweredByNoAlways "DeFade.org".
timestampNoISO time the response was assembled.
topHoldersNoTop 20 accounts: rank, address, walletAddress, amount, percentage, solBalance, isProtocol, protocolLabel.
lockedSupplyNopct plus a lockers array naming each escrow.
totalHoldersNoHolder count, estimated from the top accounts.
concentrationNotop5, top10, top20 as percent of supply, counting real wallets only.
deferredUnlockNoSupply that unlocks back to the deployer later: pct, unlockDate, cancelablePct. Null when none.
protocolHoldingsNoWhat was excluded: count and totalPct.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed9 schema fields changedv0.2.3
    • changedOutput schema / properties / bundles / type
      Previous value: -"object"New value: +[
+  "object",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / concentration / type
      Previous value: -"object"New value: +[
+  "object",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / deferredUnlock / type
      Previous value: -"object"New value: +[
+  "object",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / lockedSupply / type
      Previous value: -"object"New value: +[
+  "object",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / poweredBy / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / protocolHoldings / type
      Previous value: -"object"New value: +[
+  "object",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / timestamp / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / topHolders / type
      Previous value: -"array"New value: +[
+  "array",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / totalHolders / type
      Previous value: -"number"New value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already specify readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns classified top holders and supply share, which is consistent. It doesn't contradict the annotations, though it could explicitly mention no side effects, but the annotations cover that.

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 somewhat lengthy but every sentence adds useful detail, such as classification logic, usage examples, and parameter constraints. It is well-structured with a clear topic sentence and supporting details, without redundant filler.

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?

The description provides enough context for an agent to decide when and how to call the tool, including what it returns (classified top holders and supply share). While an output schema exists, the description doesn't enumerate every field, but it's sufficient for typical usage and complements the schema.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Both parameters are fully described with detailed explanations and examples. The 'address' parameter includes format specifics and excludes non-token addresses, while 'chain' explains when it's required and default behavior. Schema coverage is 100% and the description adds valuable edge-case information.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: it provides holder distribution with classifications to reflect actual holders. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly listing what it is not for, making its scope unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly states when to use it (to answer supply concentration and potential chart collapse) and when not to use it (for large holder activity, hidden actors, or pool info), pointing to specific sibling tools. This gives clear usage 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