Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
token-launcher

token-launcher

by PonzuTech
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ponzu_presale_refund

Refund tokens from a Ponzu presale before launch. Return 80% of proportional ETH; 20% token penalty stays as bonus for other holders.

Instructions

Refund tokens from a Ponzu presale. Available before launch only. 20% token penalty (stays in presale as pro-rata bonus for holders). 80% of proportional ETH returned.

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": {
      "presaleAddress": "<presaleAddress>",
      "tokenAmount": "<tokenAmount>"
    },
    "name": "ponzu_presale_refund"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenAmountYesToken amount to refund (e.g. "1000")
presaleAddressYesPresale contract address

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the 20% token penalty and 80% ETH return, plus the penalty stays as pro-rata bonus, offering good behavioral 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?

Three concise sentences deliver essential information: action, availability, and outcome. No wasted words, effectively front-loaded.

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 refund tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the return (ETH) and penalty. It could elaborate on how the refund amount is calculated, but overall it's complete enough for an agent.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-level information beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 refunds tokens from a Ponzu presale, specifying it's available only before launch. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ponzu_presale_buy and claim tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly states 'Available before launch only,' giving clear temporal usage guidance. It doesn't name alternatives for after launch, but the condition is sufficient for decision-making.

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