Tanod MCP server

chainpeek: a transaction receipt on Ethereum, Base or Robinhood Chain

get_transaction_receipt

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the receipt of a mined transaction on Ethereum, Base, or Robinhood Chain using its hash. Returns the transaction status and raw logs.

Instructions

chainpeek: Get a transaction receipt on Ethereum, Base or Robinhood Chain. For value, nonce and confirmations too use get_transaction; for decoded events use decode_tx_logs. Returns the receipt of a mined transaction. An unknown or pending hash is a 200 with status: not_found. One RPC read. Ethereum, Base and Robinhood only. Read-only. Reads are cached up to 30 s. A bad hash is a 422 before any payment (not charged). An unknown or pending hash is charged like any answer. Typically under 1 s. Price: USD 0.002. Free: 10 chain reads per IP per UTC day. Docs: https://tanod.dev/learn/ethereum-rpc-reads-api.html

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`hash`	Yes	Transaction hash (0x + 64 hex).
`chain`	Yes	ethereum, base or robinhood (Robinhood Chain, chain id 4663).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No
`from`	No
`hash`	No
`type`	No
`block`	No
`chain`	No
`error`	No	Only on an error result: an object {code, message}, or the reason string of an x402 PaymentRequired object.
`status`	No
`fee_wei`	No
`gas_used`	No
`log_count`	No
`block_hash`	No
`l1_fee_wei`	No
`status_note`	No
`contract_address`	No
`transaction_index`	No
`cumulative_gas_used`	No
`effective_gas_price_wei`	No
`effective_gas_price_gwei`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Oct 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: 30 s cache window, single RPC read, sub-1s latency, 422 on a bad hash with no charge, unknown/pending hashes charged, USD 0.002 price and 10 free reads/IP/day. This is exactly the cost and failure-mode context an agent needs before invoking a paid tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose and sibling routing, then pricing/behavior. The chain enumeration is stated twice (opening sentence and 'Ethereum, Base and Robinhood only'), which is minor redundancy in an otherwise dense, useful block.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists so return structure needn't be spelled out, yet the description still flags the status: not_found response shape. Combined with cost, caching, and failure semantics, nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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% (hash pattern, chain enum all documented), so the baseline is 3. The description earns a bump by tying outcomes to the hash parameter — bad hash yields a 422 pre-payment, unknown/pending hash yields a 200 with status: not_found — which meaningfully informs how to interpret the input.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get a transaction receipt') and bounds the scope to three named chains. It explicitly differentiates from siblings get_transaction and decode_tx_logs, so an agent can route without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Names two alternatives with the exact conditions that select them ('For value, nonce and confirmations too use get_transaction; for decoded events use decode_tx_logs'). It also states the when-not case: unknown or pending hashes return status: not_found rather than failing.

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

Deploy Server