Skip to main content
Glama
buildwithgrove

Grove's MCP Server for Pocket Network

list_blockchain_services

Discover available blockchain networks supported by Pocket Network, including Ethereum, Solana, Cosmos, and Sui. Filter services by category to identify compatible networks for your decentralized applications.

Instructions

List all available blockchain services/networks supported by Pocket Network

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryNoOptional category filter (e.g., "evm", "layer2", "non-evm")

Implementation Reference

  • Handler logic for 'list_blockchain_services' tool: extracts optional category from args, calls blockchainService.getServicesByCategory() or getAllServices(), and returns the services list as formatted JSON text.
    case 'list_blockchain_services': {
      const category = args?.category as string | undefined;
      const services = category
        ? blockchainService.getServicesByCategory(category)
        : blockchainService.getAllServices();
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(services, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Input schema defining the optional 'category' parameter for filtering blockchain services.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        category: {
          type: 'string',
          description: 'Optional category filter (e.g., "evm", "layer2", "non-evm")',
        },
      },
    },
  • Tool registration entry in the tools array returned by registerBlockchainHandlers, including name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: 'list_blockchain_services',
      description: 'List all available blockchain services/networks supported by Pocket Network',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          category: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Optional category filter (e.g., "evm", "layer2", "non-evm")',
          },
        },
      },
    },
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 it's a list operation, implying read-only behavior, but lacks details on output format, pagination, rate limits, or error conditions. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with no wasted content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter) and lack of output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It doesn't explain what the output includes (e.g., service names, network IDs) or behavioral aspects like error handling, leaving gaps for an AI agent to use it effectively.

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 single optional parameter 'category' documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 ('List') and resource ('all available blockchain services/networks supported by Pocket Network'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_categories' or 'list_endpoints', which reduces it from 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.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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. With many sibling tools available (e.g., 'list_categories', 'list_endpoints', 'get_blockchain_service'), there is no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions for selecting this tool.

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/buildwithgrove/mcp-pocket'

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