Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
solana-mcp-server

solana-mcp-server

by davidsyahshi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get SOL balance

get_balance
Read-only

Retrieves the native SOL balance for a Solana wallet address, returning both lamports and SOL so you can check available funds.

Instructions

Returns the native SOL balance of a Solana address (in lamports and SOL).

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": "get_balance"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesBase58 Solana wallet address

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and network-dependency are covered. The description adds genuine value by disclosing the return units (lamports and SOL), which matters given there is no output schema, but says nothing about behavior for invalid or unfunded addresses.

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?

One sentence, no filler, with the resource and return units front-loaded. Every clause earns its place.

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 single-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and clear annotations, the description covers purpose and return units adequately. Only edge-case behavior (invalid address, zero-balance accounts) is absent, a minor 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% and the single address parameter is fully documented as a 'Base58 Solana wallet address'. The description adds no further parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (returns) and resource (native SOL balance) plus the units returned, which cleanly separates it from get_token_accounts (SPL tokens) and get_transaction. It doesn't explicitly name the sibling it replaces, so differentiation is inferred from 'native SOL' rather than stated.

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?

The read-only nature implies 'call this to check a wallet's SOL holdings', but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-to-use-an-alternative guidance, nor any note about when get_token_accounts or recent_activity would be more appropriate.

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