Skip to main content
Glama

provider_lookup_address

Retrieve the ENS name associated with a specific Ethereum address using this tool, simplifying blockchain address identification and enhancing wallet management.

Instructions

Lookup the ENS name for an address

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesThe address to lookup

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the provider.lookupAddress call to retrieve the ENS name for the given Ethereum address.
    export const lookupAddressHandler = async (input: any): Promise<ToolResultSchema> => {
      try {
        if (!input.address) {
          return createErrorResponse("Address is required");
        }
    
        const provider = getProvider();
        if (!provider) {
          return createErrorResponse("Provider is required to lookup ENS name, please set the provider URL");
        }
        const name = await provider.lookupAddress(input.address);
    
        return createSuccessResponse(
        name ? `ENS name retrieved successfully
          Name: ${name}
        ` : "No ENS name found for this address");
      } catch (error) {
        return createErrorResponse(`Failed to lookup ENS name: ${(error as Error).message}`);
      }
    };
  • Input schema definition for the tool, specifying the required 'address' parameter.
    {
      name: "provider_lookup_address",
      description: "Lookup the ENS name for an address",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          address: { type: "string", description: "The address to lookup" }
        },
        required: ["address"]
      }
    },
  • src/tools.ts:598-598 (registration)
    Maps the tool name 'provider_lookup_address' to its handler function in the handlers dictionary.
    "provider_lookup_address": lookupAddressHandler,
Behavior2/5

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 states the lookup action but does not cover critical aspects such as network requirements, error conditions (e.g., invalid addresses or unregistered ENS names), rate limits, or response format. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves in practice.

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, direct sentence with zero wasted words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration, earning full marks for brevity and clarity.

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

Completeness2/5

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 is incomplete for a tool that interacts with blockchain systems. It omits essential context like network dependencies, error handling, and return value details (e.g., ENS name string or null), leaving the agent with insufficient information for reliable use.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'address' clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond the schema, such as address format (e.g., Ethereum 0x-prefixed hex) or validation rules. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 'Lookup' and the resource 'ENS name for an address', making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'provider_resolve_name' (which resolves names to addresses), leaving some ambiguity about the reverse mapping relationship.

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. It does not mention sibling tools like 'provider_resolve_name' for reverse lookups or clarify the context (e.g., Ethereum blockchain, ENS system), leaving the agent to infer usage scenarios without explicit direction.

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

Related 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/dcSpark/mcp-cryptowallet-evm'

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