Bit2Me MCP Server

earn_get_rewards_config

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve global Earn/Staking rewards configuration to understand reward details for all positions, including lock periods, reward symbols, and timestamps.

Instructions

Get global rewards configuration for Earn/Staking. Returns position rewards configuration including position_id, user_id, symbol, lock_period_id, reward_symbol, and timestamps. Use this to understand reward configuration for all positions. [PRIVATE]

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": "earn_get_rewards_config"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`jwt`	No	Optional session token for authentication. API keys are recommended for most use cases.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv4.1.4Jun 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds value by disclosing the returned fields, the global scope, and the [PRIVATE] marker, which signals sensitive data considerations beyond the annotations.

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 concise sentences deliver the purpose, the response scope, and a privacy signal without fluff. The key 'global' and 'all positions' framing is front-loaded.

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 simple optional-parameter read-only tool, the description sufficiently covers purpose, scope, and returned fields despite lacking an output schema. It could be slightly more explicit about how this differs from the position-specific sibling, but that is not a major gap.

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 100% for the only parameter, jwt, and the schema already explains it as an optional session token. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool gets global rewards configuration for Earn/Staking, which identifies the resource and scope. It distinguishes itself from the sibling earn_get_position_rewards_config by emphasizing 'global' and 'all positions'.

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?

It explicitly says to use this to understand reward configuration for all positions, providing a clear intended context. It does not explicitly mention the position-specific sibling as an alternative, but the global versus position scope is strongly implied.

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

Deploy Server