sui-mcp-server

sui_batch_get_transactions

Retrieve up to 50 Sui transactions in a single request, with isolated per-item errors that do not stop the batch.

Instructions

Fetch up to 50 transactions in one round-trip. Per-item errors do not fail the batch.

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": {
      "digests": "<digests>"
    },
    "name": "sui_batch_get_transactions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`digests`	Yes
`source`	No
`network`	No	Sui network. Defaults to the server's configured default (usually mainnet).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the full burden. It discloses per-item error tolerance (important) but omits other behaviors like order preservation, missing digest handling, rate limits, or auth requirements. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every word adds value. No redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema, so return format is unknown. Description covers batch size and error handling but does not explain what is returned for each digest (e.g., full transaction object vs. subset). Adequate for a simple batch tool but leaves gaps.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is low (33%, only network has description). The description adds minimal value: only indirectly mentions digests via 'transactions' but fails to explain source or network roles. Insufficient compensation for low schema 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?

Description clearly states the tool fetches transactions in a batch of up to 50, with a key behavioral differentiator (per-item errors don't fail batch). Clearly distinguishes from single-transaction fetch and other batch 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?

Description implies when to use (multiple transactions at once) but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like repeated single get_transaction calls. Provides clear context but no when-not-to-use guidance.

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