Skip to main content
Glama
Jrigada

foundry-zksync-mcp

by Jrigada

cast_send

Execute a contract transaction on zkSync by specifying the target contract, function signature, and arguments. Supports private key, keystore, and hardware wallet signing.

Instructions

Send a state-changing transaction to a deployed contract (cast send)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesAddress of the contract to send the transaction to
signatureYesFunction signature, e.g. "transfer(address,uint256)"
argsNoFunction arguments in order
rpcUrlYesRPC URL of the zkSync network
privateKeyNoRaw private key for signing. Only use for local development with well-known test keys (e.g. anvil-zksync accounts). For production, use 'account' (named keystore) or hardware wallets instead.
accountNoNamed keystore account from ~/.foundry/keystores (recommended for production). Create one with: cast wallet import <name> --interactive
keystoreNoPath to an encrypted keystore JSON file
passwordFileNoPath to a file containing the keystore password
keystorePasswordNoKeystore password (prefer passwordFile to keep it out of process args)
unlockedNoUse eth_sendTransaction with --from address (no local signing). For nodes that manage keys natively.
fromNoSender address, used with --unlocked or hardware wallets. Maps to --from for cast/deploy, --sender for forge script.
ledgerNoSign with a Ledger hardware wallet
trezorNoSign with a Trezor hardware wallet
awsNoSign with AWS KMS (requires AWS_KMS_KEY_ID env var)
gcpNoSign with Google Cloud KMS (requires GCP_PROJECT_ID, GCP_LOCATION, GCP_KEY_RING, GCP_KEY_NAME, GCP_KEY_VERSION env vars)
valueNoETH value to send with the transaction, e.g. "0.1ether" or amount in wei
gasLimitNoGas limit override
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'state-changing' but does not detail side effects, authorization requirements (e.g., needing a private key or keystore), rate limits, or potential consequences. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (17 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value (likely a transaction hash), error handling, prerequisites (deployed contract, signing method), or the relationship between multiple signing options.

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?

The input schema describes all parameters with good coverage (100%), so the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 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 verb 'Send' and the resource 'state-changing transaction to a deployed contract', which matches the tool's function. The parenthetical '(cast send)' further identifies it, and it is distinct from siblings like cast_call (read-only) and deploy.

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 this tool is for state-changing transactions, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like cast_call for read-only queries or deploy for contract creation. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are provided.

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/Jrigada/foundry-zksync-mcp'

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