Skip to main content
Glama

wallet_provider_set

Configure the RPC provider URL for Ethereum and EVM-compatible blockchains, overriding the default ETH mainnet or environment variable settings.

Instructions

Set the provider URL. By default, the provider URL is set to the ETH mainnet or the URL set in the PROVIDER_URL environment variable.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
providerURLYesThe provider RPC URL

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the wallet_provider_set tool. It calls setProvider with the input providerURL and returns a formatted success or error response.
    export const setProviderHandler = async (input: any): Promise<ToolResultSchema> => {
      try {
        setProvider(input.providerURL);
        return createSuccessResponse(`Provider set successfully:
          Provider URL: ${input.providerURL}
        `);
      } catch (error) {
        return createErrorResponse(`Failed to set provider: ${(error as Error).message}`);
      }
    };
  • The input schema and metadata definition for the wallet_provider_set tool.
    {
      name: "wallet_provider_set",
      description: "Set the provider URL. By default, the provider URL is set to the ETH mainnet or the URL set in the PROVIDER_URL environment variable.",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          providerURL: { type: "string", description: "The provider RPC URL" }
        },
        required: ["providerURL"]
      }
    },
  • src/tools.ts:558-558 (registration)
    Registration mapping the tool name 'wallet_provider_set' to its handler function in the central handlers dictionary.
    "wallet_provider_set": setProviderHandler,
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but provides minimal behavioral context. It mentions the tool sets a configuration (implying mutation) and defaults, but doesn't disclose critical traits like persistence scope (session vs. global), permission requirements, error handling, or side effects on other tools. This is inadequate for a configuration tool.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and provides context on defaults. It avoids redundancy but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating purpose from default behavior).

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?

For a configuration tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral impact (e.g., how this affects other wallet/network tools), error cases, or return values. Given the complexity of provider settings in blockchain contexts, this leaves significant gaps.

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 coverage is 100% with one parameter well-documented as 'provider RPC URL'. The description adds marginal value by contextualizing it as overriding defaults or environment variables, but doesn't elaborate on format, validation, or examples beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 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 action ('Set') and resource ('provider URL'), specifying it configures the RPC endpoint. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on provider configuration rather than wallet operations or network queries, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like environment variables.

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 description implies usage when overriding default or environment-set provider URLs, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., when to rely on defaults vs. set manually) or prerequisites. It mentions defaults but doesn't clarify trade-offs or scenarios.

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