El servidor bonk-mcp implementa la funcionalidad de la cadena de bloques Solana para la plataforma de lanzamiento LetsBonk.
Lanzamiento de token: lanza cualquier token en letsbonk.fun
Comercio de tokens: compra o vende cualquier token en letsbonk.fun
Related MCP server: Solana MCP Server
El servidor bonk-mcp se puede configurar en Claude Desktop añadiéndolo a la configuración de servidores MCP. Deberá proporcionar:
Ruta al directorio bonk-mcp
Variables de entorno:
KEYPAIR : Su par de claves de Solana
RPC_URL : punto final de RPC de Solana (por ejemplo, https://api.mainnet-beta.solana.com )
En MacOS: ~/Library/Application\ Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json En Windows: %APPDATA%/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
"mcpServers": {
"bonk-mcp": {
"command": "uv",
"args": [
"--directory",
"<PATH_TO_BONK_MCP_DIRECTORY>/bonk-mcp",
"run",
"bonk-mcp"
],
"env": {
"KEYPAIR": "<YOUR_SOLANA_KEYPAIR>",
"RPC_URL": "https://api.mainnet-beta.solana.com"
}
}
}"mcpServers": {
"bonk-mcp": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"bonk-mcp"
],
"env": {
"KEYPAIR": "<YOUR_SOLANA_KEYPAIR>",
"RPC_URL": "https://api.mainnet-beta.solana.com"
}
}
}Para preparar el paquete para su distribución:
Sincronizar dependencias y actualizar archivo de bloqueo:
uv syncDistribuciones de paquetes de compilación:
uv buildEsto creará distribuciones de origen y de rueda en el directorio dist/ .
Publicar en PyPI:
uv publishNota: Deberás configurar las credenciales de PyPI a través de variables de entorno o indicadores de comando:
Token: --token o UV_PUBLISH_TOKEN
O nombre de usuario/contraseña: --username / UV_PUBLISH_USERNAME y --password / UV_PUBLISH_PASSWORD
Dado que los servidores MCP se ejecutan en stdio, la depuración puede ser complicada. Para una experiencia óptima, recomendamos usar el Inspector MCP .
Puede iniciar el Inspector MCP a través de npm con este comando:
npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector uv --directory <PATH_TO_BONK_MCP_DIRECTORY>/bonk-mcp run bonk-mcpAl iniciarse, el Inspector mostrará una URL a la que podrá acceder en su navegador para comenzar a depurar.
Launch a new meme token on Solana using Raydium launchpad
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| description | Yes | Token description | |
| image_url | Yes | Image URL to use for token | |
| name | Yes | Token name | |
| symbol | Yes | Token symbol/ticker | |
| telegram | No | Telegram group URL (optional) | |
| No | Twitter handle/URL (optional) | ||
| website | No | Website URL (optional) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the action ('Launch') which implies a write/mutation operation, but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits such as required permissions, cost implications, irreversible effects, rate limits, or what the response looks like. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given this is a complex write operation (token launch) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like permissions, costs, or response format, nor does it provide usage context. The 100% schema coverage helps with parameters, but overall context for safe and effective use is lacking.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The description provides no parameter-specific information beyond what's already in the input schema, which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all 7 parameters. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate schema documentation, but the description adds no additional semantic context about parameter usage or relationships.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('Launch') and target resource ('new meme token on Solana using Raydium launchpad'), providing specific verb+resource. However, since there are no sibling tools mentioned, it cannot demonstrate differentiation from alternatives, preventing a perfect score.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions. It simply states what the tool does without context about appropriate scenarios or limitations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0launch-tokenScored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools. The single tool has a clear and distinct purpose focused on launching meme tokens on Solana.
A single tool inherently has perfect naming consistency as there are no other tools to compare against. The name 'launch-token' follows a clear verb-noun pattern.
One tool is too few for a server with a domain like launching tokens, as it lacks essential operations like checking token status, managing launches, or handling transactions. This severely limits agent functionality.
The tool surface is severely incomplete; it only provides a launch function without supporting operations like querying token details, updating launches, or deleting/canceling tokens. This will cause frequent agent failures in real-world scenarios.
Non-custodial Solana toolkit: rug-checks, swaps, portfolios, token minting, multisig, Arweave.
Plan a Solana token launch
Launch Solana coins from your AI. You approve each launch in your wallet and earn creator fees.
Full Solana DeFi coverage: launchpads, tokens, trades, and wallets, decoded at scale.
