Skip to main content
Glama
alexandresanlim

Mempool MCP Server

get-address-txs-mempool

Retrieve pending Bitcoin transactions for a specific address from the mempool to monitor unconfirmed activity.

Instructions

Returns mempool transactions for an address

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesThe address to get mempool txs for

Implementation Reference

  • Registers the MCP tool 'get-address-txs-mempool' including input schema (address: string) and a thin handler that calls AddressService.getAddressTxsMempool and returns formatted text content.
    private registerGetAddressTxsMempoolHandler(): void {
      this.server.tool(
        "get-address-txs-mempool",
        "Returns mempool transactions for an address",
        {
          address: z.string().describe("The address to get mempool txs for"),
        },
        async ({ address }) => {
          const text = await this.addressService.getAddressTxsMempool({ address });
          return { content: [{ type: "text", text }] };
        }
      );
    }
  • Executes the core logic for retrieving and formatting mempool transactions for the given address using the request service.
    async getAddressTxsMempool({ address }: IAddressParameter): Promise<string> {
      const data = await this.requestService.getAddressTxsMempool({ address });
      return formatResponse<IAddressTxResponse[]>(
        "Address Mempool Transactions",
        data
      );
    }
  • Performs the actual API request to fetch mempool transactions from the backend endpoint `/address/{address}/txs/mempool`.
    async getAddressTxsMempool({ address }: { address: string }): Promise<IAddressTxResponse[] | null> {
      return this.client.makeRequest<IAddressTxResponse[]>(`address/${address}/txs/mempool`);
    }
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 returns data but doesn't mention any behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, data freshness, or whether this is a read-only operation. This leaves significant gaps for a tool interacting with a blockchain mempool.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for its purpose, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 complexity of blockchain tools and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the returned data looks like (e.g., transaction list format), potential errors, or how it differs from sibling tools, making it inadequate for full contextual understanding.

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 'address' parameter clearly documented. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what's in the schema, such as address format or validation rules. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('returns') and resource ('mempool transactions for an address'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-address-txs' or 'get-address-txs-chain', which likely return different types of address transactions.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling tools related to address transactions (e.g., 'get-address-txs', 'get-address-txs-chain'), the description lacks context about when mempool transactions are needed versus confirmed ones, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/alexandresanlim/mempool-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server