sui-mcp-server

sui_list_owned_objects

Retrieve paginated list of objects owned by a Sui address, including object ID, version, and type.

Instructions

List the objects an address owns, paginated. Each item carries object_id + version + type — fetch full bodies via sui_get_object or sui_batch_get_objects.

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": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "sui_list_owned_objects"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`address`	Yes
`page_size`	No
`page_token`	No
`network`	No	Sui network. Defaults to the server's configured default.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 23, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided. Description discloses pagination and content of items but does not mention read-only nature, authentication, rate limits, or ordering. Adequate for a simple list tool but lacks some behavioral detail.

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?

Single sentence that packs purpose, pagination, item fields, and guidance to siblings. No fluff, well structured.

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 list tool with pagination, the description covers what's returned and next steps. Lacks mention of sorting or ordering but is sufficient given tool complexity and absence of output schema.

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 only 25% (only network has description). Description adds pagination context for page_size/page_token but does not explain address or page_size range. Provides marginal value beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states it lists objects owned by an address with pagination. Mentions item fields (id, version, type) and directs to sibling tools for full bodies, differentiating it from sui_get_object and sui_batch_get_objects.

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?

Explicitly advises using sui_get_object or sui_batch_get_objects for full object bodies, implying this tool is for lightweight listing. Pagination mention sets expectations for large result sets.

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