Skip to main content
Glama

helius_get_transaction

Retrieve Solana blockchain transaction details using a signature to verify and analyze on-chain activity.

Instructions

Get a transaction by its signature

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
signatureYes
commitmentNo

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that implements the logic for fetching a Solana transaction by signature using the Helius RPC connection.
    export const getTransactionHandler = async (input: GetTransactionInput): Promise<ToolResultSchema> => {
      try {
        // Use the newer signature with explicit config object
        const transaction = await (helius as any as Helius).connection.getTransaction(
          input.signature,
          { maxSupportedTransactionVersion: 0, commitment: input.commitment as any }
        );
        
        if (!transaction) {
          return createErrorResponse(`Transaction not found for signature: ${input.signature}`);
        }
        
        return createSuccessResponse(`Transaction details: ${JSON.stringify(transaction, null, 2)}`);
      } catch (error) {
        return createErrorResponse(`Error getting transaction: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}`);
      }
    }
  • The input schema defining parameters for the helius_get_transaction tool: signature (required) and optional commitment level.
    {
      name: "helius_get_transaction",
      description: "Get a transaction by its signature",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          signature: { type: "string" },
          commitment: { type: "string", enum: ["confirmed", "finalized", "processed"] }
        },
        required: ["signature"]
      }
    },
  • src/tools.ts:558-558 (registration)
    Registration of the tool name to its handler function in the handlers dictionary.
    "helius_get_transaction": getTransactionHandler,
  • src/tools.ts:12-12 (registration)
    Import of the getTransactionHandler from the helius handlers module.
    getTransactionHandler,
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 but only states the basic action. It fails to mention critical traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, error conditions, or what the transaction data includes, leaving significant gaps in understanding tool behavior.

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 no wasted words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. Every part of the sentence contributes to the core purpose, achieving optimal efficiency in communication.

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 complexity of a transaction retrieval tool with 2 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavior, parameter usage, return values, and error handling, failing to provide a complete context for effective tool invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but only implies the 'signature' parameter without explaining its format or purpose. It doesn't mention the 'commitment' parameter at all. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, resulting in a baseline score due to inadequate parameter explanation.

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 ('Get') and resource ('transaction by its signature'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'helius_get_account_info' or 'helius_get_asset' beyond specifying the transaction resource type, missing explicit sibling distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context about use cases, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'helius_poll_transaction_confirmation' or 'helius_get_signatures_for_address', leaving the agent without usage 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

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-server-helius'

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