sui-mcp-server

query_transactions

Search and filter Sui blockchain transactions by sender, recipient, input object, changed object, or Move function.

Instructions

Search and filter transactions by sender, recipient, input object, changed object, or Move function.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "filter": "<filter>"
    },
    "name": "query_transactions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`filter`	Yes	Transaction filter. Examples: { "FromAddress": "0x..." }, { "ToAddress": "0x..." }, { "InputObject": "0x..." }, { "ChangedObject": "0x..." }, { "MoveFunction": { "package": "0x2", "module": "coin", "function": "transfer" } }
`limit`	No	Max transactions (default: 50)
`order`	No	Sort order (default: descending)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.3May 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so description bears full burden. It mentions default limit (50) and order (descending), which is helpful, but omits side effects, authentication needs, or pagination behavior. Partial transparency.

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?

Single sentence of 16 words, front-loaded with key purpose. No fluff.

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

Completeness2/5

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

No output schema; description does not mention return type or structure. For a search tool, agents need to know fields returned and pagination limits beyond the default. Missing critical context.

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 coverage is 100%, so description adds little beyond examples already in schema. The listing of filter types is useful but redundant with schema descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 searches and filters transactions, explicitly listing filter criteria (sender, recipient, input object, changed object, Move function). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_transaction (single transaction) and query_events (events).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for broad search but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like get_transaction or query_events. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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

Deploy Server