web3-mcp-server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Server capabilities have not been inspected yet.
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| fetch_balanceC | Get the balance of a wallet |
| read_contractC | Read a value from a contract |
| fetch_token_balanceC | Get the balance of a token |
| fetch_quoteC | Get the price of a token |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
The tools have some overlap that could cause confusion, particularly between fetch_balance and fetch_token_balance, as both involve retrieving balances but target different resources (wallet vs. token). However, the descriptions clarify the distinctions, and the other tools (fetch_quote, read_contract) are clearly distinct in purpose.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (e.g., fetch_balance, fetch_quote, fetch_token_balance, read_contract). This uniformity makes the set predictable and easy to understand, with no deviations in naming conventions.
With only 4 tools, the server feels slightly thin for a web3 domain, which typically involves more operations like transactions, token transfers, or contract interactions. While the tools cover basic read-only functions, the count is borderline for comprehensive coverage in this scope.
The tool set is significantly incomplete for a web3 server, as it lacks essential operations such as sending transactions, interacting with smart contracts beyond reading, or managing tokens. This creates gaps that will likely cause agent failures when trying to perform common blockchain tasks.