Skip to main content
Glama
baskcart

W3 Ledger MCP Server

by baskcart

check_balance

Retrieve token balances for a public key, including per-token amounts, maturity details, merchant breakdowns, and loyalty tier information with cashback rates.

Instructions

Check the token balances (DAH, DAHYM, DAHLOR, W3SH) for a public key. Returns total balance, per-token breakdown, maturity info, merchant breakdown, and W3SH loyalty tier (Seed/Twig/Kindling/Log/Joist) with cashback rate and progress.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
player_publickeyYesThe public key (hex) to check balances for.

Implementation Reference

  • The handler logic for `check_balance` which calls the `/checkbalance` endpoint using the provided `player_publickey`.
    case 'check_balance': {
        const key = args.player_publickey as string;
        const res = await client.get('/checkbalance', {
            player_publickey: key,
        });
        return toResult(res.data, !res.ok);
    }
  • The definition of `check_balance` including its description and input schema.
    {
        name: 'check_balance',
        description:
            'Check the token balances (DAH, DAHYM, DAHLOR, W3SH) for a public key. ' +
            'Returns total balance, per-token breakdown, maturity info, merchant breakdown, ' +
            'and W3SH loyalty tier (Seed/Twig/Kindling/Log/Joist) with cashback rate and progress.',
        inputSchema: {
            type: 'object',
            properties: {
                player_publickey: {
                    type: 'string',
                    description: 'The public key (hex) to check balances for.',
                },
            },
            required: ['player_publickey'],
        },
        access: 'read',
    },
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It extensively discloses return structure including total balance, per-token breakdown, maturity info, merchant breakdown, and specific W3SH loyalty tiers (Seed/Twig/Kindling/Log/Joist) with cashback details. However, it omits operational aspects like rate limits, caching, or authentication requirements.

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 with zero waste: first establishes the action and scope, second details return values. Information is front-loaded with the primary action ('Check') first, and every clause earns its place—particularly the return value details which compensate for the missing output schema.

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?

For a single-parameter query tool, the description is complete. It explains the input (public key), the action (check balances), and comprehensively describes the return structure (total, breakdowns, maturity, loyalty tiers) despite the absence of an output schema or annotations.

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 coverage is 100% with the parameter 'player_publickey' fully documented as 'The public key (hex) to check balances for.' The description mentions 'for a public key' but adds no additional semantic context, examples, or format details beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

The description uses specific verb 'Check' with explicit resource 'token balances' and lists specific tokens (DAH, DAHYM, DAHLOR, W3SH). It clearly distinguishes from transactional siblings (claim_gift_card, purchase_product, etc.) by being a query operation focused on 'public key' lookup.

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?

While the 'Check' verb implies read-only usage versus the transactional siblings (claim/create/purchase), there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria.

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/baskcart/w3-ledger-mcp-server'

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