Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
startmining-mcp

startmining-mcp

by TIBSP
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_recent_blocks

Fetch up to 50 recent Bitcoin blocks from a self-hosted node to analyze short-term block times, fees, and mining activity.

Instructions

Get the most recent Bitcoin blocks (max 50, i.e. a few hours). For weekly block time, fees or hashprice use get_weekly_stats

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_recent_blocks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of blocks to return (default: 10, max: 50)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does usefully convey the temporal scope ('a few hours') and the 50-block ceiling, but says nothing about read-only nature (only implied by 'get'), pagination, or what a returned block looks like.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler; the primary capability is front-loaded and the routing hint follows immediately after.

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 zero-required-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the scope, time span, and the key alternative. Nothing critical is missing, though return shape and error/limit behavior remain unaddressed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and already documents the limit parameter with its default and max, so the baseline is 3. The description earns a bump by contextualizing what a limit of 50 means in time ('a few hours'), which the schema does not convey.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (recent Bitcoin blocks) with an explicit scope bound of max 50 / a few hours. It distinguishes itself from get_weekly_stats, but does not differentiate from other siblings like get_difficulty or get_mempool, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Gives an explicit alternative for adjacent needs: 'For weekly block time, fees or hashprice use get_weekly_stats.' That is clear routing guidance, though it offers no when-not condition for the tool itself and no prerequisites.

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