Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Preflight

Preflight

by dainidude
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

preflight_token_risk

Check a token contract before trading to detect honeypot traps, transfer taxes, and owner privileges via a severity-scored report.

Instructions

Check a token contract before trading it. Returns a honeypot transfer verdict, transfer tax percentage, and owner privileges as a severity-scored ScanReport. Paid call ($0.05 USDC on Base mainnet) via x402; DEV_MODE=1 skips payment.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "preflight_token_risk"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it names what the response contains (honeypot transfer verdict, transfer tax percentage, owner privileges, severity-scored ScanReport), discloses that the call is paid at $0.05 USDC on Base mainnet via x402, and gives the DEV_MODE=1 bypass. It does not state read-only safety, latency, caching, or failure behavior, so it stops short of 5.

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?

Three short sentences: purpose first, response contents second, payment mechanics third. Nothing is wasted and the most decision-relevant fact (it costs money) is stated before truncation risk sets in.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers the essentials an agent needs — what it returns, that it costs $0.05 USDC via x402, and the DEV_MODE bypass. The remaining gap is the address parameter's chain/format semantics, which is the one thing an agent could get wrong before paying.

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 single 'address' parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. 'Token contract' implies the address is a token contract address, but it never states chain scope (Base only?) or format, leaving ambiguity that matters given the tool is Base-mainnet-specific.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Check a token contract before trading it', and the name preflight_token_risk aligns with that. It implicitly separates itself from siblings like preflight_sim or preflight_pricing by scoping to token-contract risk, but never names an alternative to sharpen the distinction.

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?

'Before trading it' gives a clear moment-of-use cue, which is real guidance. There are no when-not conditions, no exclusions (e.g. which chains are supported), and no pointer to a sibling for swap-route or pricing checks, so an agent must still infer alternatives.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools