Arc Agents MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get ERC-8004 agent data

get_agent_data

Retrieve ERC-8004 agent identity, metadata, reputation, and validation data from Arc Mainnet by agent ID, including registries, feedback, explorer links, and fetch timestamp.

Instructions

Get ERC-8004 agent data from Arc Mainnet for one agent ID: identity and registration (owner, agent wallet, metadata URI, registries), parsed metadata (name, description, services), reputation and feedback, validation data, explorer links and fetch timestamp. Some fields may be unavailable depending on the registry deployment; the API's error information is preserved. Costs $0.002 USDC per successful request, paid automatically with x402 on Arc. agentId is the ERC-8004 agent token ID (a positive integer, for example 15).

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": {
      "agentId": "<agentId>"
    },
    "name": "get_agent_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agentId`	Yes	ERC-8004 agent token ID on Arc Mainnet: a positive integer, e.g. 15

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses the $0.002 USDC per-successful-request cost with automatic x402 payment, that some fields may be unavailable depending on registry deployment, that API error information is preserved, and that a fetch timestamp is included. These are substantive behavioral traits an agent needs in order to call the tool correctly. Nothing in the description contradicts the supplied annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The content is front-loaded and every clause contributes useful information about scope, return fields, caveats, and cost. The field enumeration makes it somewhat dense and run-on, but there is no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns and does so by enumerating the fetched data categories and noting partial availability. It is nearly complete for a one-parameter read tool, though it does not describe response structure or pagination behavior.

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% and the single parameter is already fully documented in the schema as a positive integer ERC-8004 token ID with an example. The description repeats the same meaning without adding format or edge-case detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Get ERC-8004 agent data from Arc Mainnet for one agent ID') and enumerates exactly what is returned: identity, metadata, reputation, validation, links, and timestamp. An agent can tell precisely what this tool retrieves without opening the schema.

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 makes clear this is for a single agent ID and notes the per-request cost, which helps an agent decide whether to call it. However, it gives no explicit when-not guidance, no alternatives, and no prerequisites beyond the payment model.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools

get_agent_dataA