Skip to main content
Glama
covalenthq

GoldRush MCP Server

by covalenthq

nft_check_ownership

Verify NFT ownership in a collection by checking a wallet address against a contract on supported blockchains, with optional trait filtering.

Instructions

Commonly used to verify ownership of NFTs (including ERC-721 and ERC-1155) within a collection. Required: chainName (blockchain network), walletAddress (wallet address), collectionContract (NFT collection). Optional: traitsFilter (filter by trait types), valuesFilter (filter by trait values). Returns ownership status and matching NFTs if owned.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainNameYesThe blockchain network to query (e.g., 'eth-mainnet', 'matic-mainnet', 'bsc-mainnet').
walletAddressYesThe wallet address to check NFT ownership for. Passing in an ENS, RNS, Lens Handle, or an Unstoppable Domain resolves automatically.
collectionContractYesThe NFT collection contract address to check ownership in. Must be a valid ERC-721 or ERC-1155 contract address.
traitsFilterNoFilter by specific trait types (comma-separated list of trait names to filter by).
valuesFilterNoFilter by specific trait values (comma-separated list of trait values to match).

Implementation Reference

  • The tool definition and handler for nft_check_ownership within NftService.ts. It uses Zod to validate input parameters and calls goldRushClient.NftService.checkOwnershipInNft to retrieve the ownership data.
    server.tool(
        "nft_check_ownership",
        "Commonly used to verify ownership of NFTs (including ERC-721 and ERC-1155) within a collection.\n" +
            "Required: chainName (blockchain network), walletAddress (wallet address), collectionContract (NFT collection).\n" +
            "Optional: traitsFilter (filter by trait types), valuesFilter (filter by trait values).\n" +
            "Returns ownership status and matching NFTs if owned.",
        {
            chainName: z
                .enum(Object.values(ChainName) as [string, ...string[]])
                .describe(
                    "The blockchain network to query (e.g., 'eth-mainnet', 'matic-mainnet', 'bsc-mainnet')."
                ),
            walletAddress: z
                .string()
                .describe(
                    "The wallet address to check NFT ownership for. Passing in an ENS, RNS, Lens Handle, or an Unstoppable Domain resolves automatically."
                ),
            collectionContract: z
                .string()
                .describe(
                    "The NFT collection contract address to check ownership in. Must be a valid ERC-721 or ERC-1155 contract address."
                ),
            traitsFilter: z
                .string()
                .optional()
                .describe(
                    "Filter by specific trait types (comma-separated list of trait names to filter by)."
                ),
            valuesFilter: z
                .string()
                .optional()
                .describe(
                    "Filter by specific trait values (comma-separated list of trait values to match)."
                ),
        },
        async (params) => {
            try {
                const response =
                    await goldRushClient.NftService.checkOwnershipInNft(
                        params.chainName as Chain,
                        params.walletAddress,
                        params.collectionContract,
                        {
                            traitsFilter: params.traitsFilter,
                            valuesFilter: params.valuesFilter,
                        }
                    );
                return {
                    content: [
                        {
                            type: "text",
                            text: stringifyWithBigInt(response.data),
                        },
                    ],
                };
            } catch (err) {
                return {
                    content: [{ type: "text", text: `Error: ${err}` }],
                    isError: true,
                };
            }
        }
    );
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It partially satisfies this by stating the return value ('ownership status and matching NFTs if owned'), but fails to mention safety characteristics (read-only vs. destructive), rate limits, error handling, or whether the operation requires authentication.

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?

The description is efficiently structured across three sentences: purpose declaration, required parameters, and optional parameters/return value. While the parameter listing is somewhat redundant given the complete schema, it serves as useful front-loaded context for quick scanning without excessive verbosity.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description adequately compensates by specifying supported NFT standards (ERC-721/1155) and return behavior. It appropriately delegates parameter details to the schema while focusing the description on functional scope, though it could benefit from mentioning error cases or empty result handling.

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, establishing a baseline score of 3. The description lists required and optional parameters but largely repeats information already present in the schema (e.g., 'chainName (blockchain network)') without adding semantic depth, examples, or clarifying the relationship between traitsFilter and valuesFilter.

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 tool 'verify[ies] ownership of NFTs (including ERC-721 and ERC-1155) within a collection,' providing specific verb, resource, and supported standards. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'nft_check_ownership_token_id' or 'nft_for_address' despite their functional overlap.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It opens with 'Commonly used' but does not specify when to choose this over 'nft_for_address' (which retrieves all NFTs) or 'nft_check_ownership_token_id' (likely for specific token IDs), leaving the agent to infer based on parameter requirements alone.

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/covalenthq/goldrush-mcp-server'

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