Skip to main content
Glama
Deconstruct2021

cryptopunks-mcp-server

get_account

Retrieve comprehensive CryptoPunks portfolio data for any Ethereum wallet or ENS name, including owned punks, sale listings, bid activity, trading history, and performance metrics.

Instructions

Get comprehensive portfolio data for any Ethereum wallet or ENS name: owned punks, punks for sale, active bids placed and received, full buy/sell history, realized PnL, and total trading volume. This is the most information-dense endpoint in the API.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesEthereum address (0x…) or ENS name (e.g. collector.eth)
owned_onlyNoIf true, return only owned punks and skip history

Implementation Reference

  • The actual implementation of getAccount which calls the upstream API.
    export async function getAccount(
      address: string,
      options?: {
        owned?: boolean;
        salesLimit?: number;
        purchasesLimit?: number;
      },
    ) {
      const params: Record<string, string> = {};
      if (options?.owned) params.owned = "true";
      if (options?.salesLimit) params.salesLimit = String(options.salesLimit);
      if (options?.purchasesLimit) params.purchasesLimit = String(options.purchasesLimit);
      return get(DATA_BASE, `/api/account/${address}`, params);
    }
  • The schema definition for get_account tool.
    get_account: {
      description:
        "Get comprehensive portfolio data for any Ethereum wallet or ENS name: owned punks, punks for sale, active bids placed and received, full buy/sell history, realized PnL, and total trading volume. This is the most information-dense endpoint in the API.",
      inputSchema: z.object({
        address: ethAddress,
        owned_only: z
          .boolean()
          .optional()
          .default(false)
          .describe("If true, return only owned punks and skip history"),
      }),
    },
  • The registration/handler switch case that maps the tool call to the api.getAccount function.
    case "get_account": {
      const result = await api.getAccount(args.address, {
        owned: args.owned_only ?? false,
      });
      return ok(result);
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses behavioral traits like returning comprehensive data and being information-dense, but it lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, or potential errors. The description does not contradict any annotations, as none exist.

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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with the first sentence clearly stating the purpose and scope, followed by a list of data types and a concluding statement about its density. Every sentence adds value without waste.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (comprehensive data retrieval) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is mostly complete but could improve by detailing output format or behavioral constraints. It covers the purpose and data types well, but additional context on response structure or limitations would enhance completeness.

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 the schema already documents both parameters well. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, as it does not explain parameter usage or interactions (e.g., how 'owned_only' affects the output). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 with specific verbs ('Get comprehensive portfolio data') and resources ('Ethereum wallet or ENS name'), and it distinguishes itself from siblings by listing detailed data types (owned punks, punks for sale, bids, history, PnL, volume) that are not covered by other tools like get_punk or get_punk_history.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool ('most information-dense endpoint in the API'), implying it's for comprehensive portfolio analysis. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives among the sibling tools, such as using get_punk for individual punk data instead.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Deconstruct2021/cryptopunks-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server