Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
iota-agent-mcp

iota-agent-mcp

by Scottcjn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

iota_cli

Execute IOTA CLI commands for blockchain operations not handled by specialized tools, enabling direct interaction with the IOTA network.

Instructions

Run an arbitrary IOTA CLI command. Use for operations not covered by other tools.

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": {
      "command": "<command>"
    },
    "name": "iota_cli"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
commandYesCLI arguments (e.g. 'client gas' or 'move new my_project')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool runs CLI commands but doesn't disclose critical traits like whether it's read-only or destructive, what permissions or authentication are needed, potential rate limits, or error handling. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior safely.

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 and front-loaded, consisting of two sentences that directly address purpose and usage without any wasted words. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information efficiently.

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 (running arbitrary CLI commands), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, potential side effects, or safety considerations, which are crucial for an agent to use it correctly in context with its siblings.

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 has 100% description coverage, with the 'command' parameter well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, as it doesn't provide additional syntax, format details, or examples. According to the rules, with high schema coverage, the baseline is 3 even without extra param info in the description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Run an arbitrary IOTA CLI command.' It specifies the verb ('Run') and resource ('IOTA CLI command'), making the action clear. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings beyond mentioning 'operations not covered by other tools,' which is somewhat vague about what those specific operations are.

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 provides clear context for usage: 'Use for operations not covered by other tools.' This implies when to use this tool versus alternatives, as it suggests using specialized sibling tools for covered operations. However, it doesn't explicitly list exclusions or name specific alternatives, which keeps it from being a perfect score.

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