Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
routstr-mcp

routstr-mcp

by ashen0x
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Routstr balance

balance
Read-only

Check the sats remaining in your Routstr wallet for each node and see how to add more funds.

Instructions

Show the sats left in the user's Routstr wallet, per node, and how to add more.

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": "balance"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond them: the result is broken down per node and includes top-up guidance. However, it omits authentication or wallet-connection requirements and what happens if the wallet is unconfigured or empty.

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?

It is a single compact sentence with the resource statement front-loaded. The trailing clause 'and how to add more' slightly muddles the scope by combining a read operation with instructional content, but there is no filler.

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?

With no input parameters and no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing the return shape, and it does so at a high level (sats per node). It leaves out error cases and authentication behavior, which are the main remaining gaps for a tool with no output schema to clarify the response.

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?

This tool takes no parameters, so parameter semantics baseline is 4. Nothing in the schema needs explaining, and the description adds only what the tool returns rather than input meaning.

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 opens with a concrete verb and resource: 'Show the sats left in the user's Routstr wallet, per node.' That is specific enough to distinguish it from the siblings ask, council, and find_models, which are unrelated. It is a clear but not explicitly differentiating statement.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies its use case (checking remaining balance) and hints that it also explains 'how to add more,' but it never states when to call this versus another tool, what prerequisites exist, or when the tool is not appropriate. The agent must infer the trigger condition.

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