StellarMCP

stellar_decode_xdr

Decode base64 Stellar transaction XDR into readable JSON format. View operations and parameters clearly.

Instructions

Decode a base64 encoded Stellar transaction XDR into a readable JSON format showing operations and parameters.

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": {
      "xdr": "<xdr>"
    },
    "name": "stellar_decode_xdr"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`xdr`	Yes	Base64 encoded transaction XDR

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.9Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the transformation (decode), the accepted encoding (base64), and the output content (operations and parameters in JSON). It does not mention malformed-input behavior or any validation limits, but for a pure decode operation the core behavior is adequately transparent.

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?

One concise, front-loaded sentence stating the action, input, and output with no filler. Every phrase earns its place.

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?

For a one-parameter pure transform with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it names the required input and the return shape. It could add error/edge-case behavior or an example output, but nothing essential for a straightforward decode call is missing.

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% and the single parameter xdr is already described as 'Base64 encoded transaction XDR' in the schema. The tool description repeats the same notion without adding format details, defaults, or examples, so it meets the baseline but adds no extra semantic value.

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 starts with a specific verb ('Decode'), identifies the exact resource ('base64 encoded Stellar transaction XDR'), and states the intended output ('readable JSON format showing operations and parameters'). This clearly separates it from reverse/helper tools such as stellar_xdr_encode and stellar_xdr_guess.

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 input condition is clear – use it when you have a base64 transaction XDR and want JSON – but there is no explicit guidance on where it fits among the related stellar_xdr_* tools (e.g., when to use stellar_xdr_guess instead for unknown XDR, or stellar_xdr_encode for the reverse direction). Usage is therefore implied rather than stated.

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