Skip to main content
Glama

insumer_wallet_trust

Produce a cryptographically signed wallet trust profile by checking stablecoins, governance tokens, NFTs, and staking positions across 24 chains. Returns per-dimension pass/fail counts for AI agent trust decisions.

Instructions

Generate a structured, ECDSA-signed wallet trust fact profile. Send a wallet address, get 36 base checks across stablecoins (USDC + USDT across 21 chains), governance tokens (UNI, AAVE, ARB, OP), NFTs (BAYC, Pudgy Penguins, Wrapped CryptoPunks), and staking positions (stETH, rETH, cbETH). Up to 40 checks across 24 chains with optional Solana, XRPL, and Bitcoin wallets. Returns per-dimension pass/fail counts and overall summary. No score, no opinion — just cryptographically verifiable evidence organized by dimension. Designed for AI agent-to-agent trust decisions. Costs 3 credits (standard) or 6 credits (proof: 'merkle').

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
walletYesEVM wallet address (0x...) to profile
solanaWalletNoSolana wallet address (base58). If provided, adds USDC on Solana check.
xrplWalletNoXRPL wallet address (r-address). If provided, adds RLUSD and USDC on XRPL checks.
bitcoinWalletNoBitcoin address. If provided, adds Bitcoin Holdings dimension (native BTC balance check).
proofNoSet to 'merkle' for EIP-1186 Merkle storage proofs on stablecoin/governance checks (6 credits).

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:278-292 (registration)
    Registration of the 'insumer_wallet_trust' tool via server.tool() with its input schema (wallet, solanaWallet, xrplWallet, bitcoinWallet, proof) and handler that calls the API POST /trust endpoint.
    server.tool(
      "insumer_wallet_trust",
      "Generate a structured, ECDSA-signed wallet trust fact profile. Send a wallet address, get 36 base checks across stablecoins (USDC + USDT across 21 chains), governance tokens (UNI, AAVE, ARB, OP), NFTs (BAYC, Pudgy Penguins, Wrapped CryptoPunks), and staking positions (stETH, rETH, cbETH). Up to 40 checks across 24 chains with optional Solana, XRPL, and Bitcoin wallets. Returns per-dimension pass/fail counts and overall summary. No score, no opinion — just cryptographically verifiable evidence organized by dimension. Designed for AI agent-to-agent trust decisions. Costs 3 credits (standard) or 6 credits (proof: 'merkle').",
      {
        wallet: z.string().describe("EVM wallet address (0x...) to profile"),
        solanaWallet: z.string().optional().describe("Solana wallet address (base58). If provided, adds USDC on Solana check."),
        xrplWallet: z.string().optional().describe("XRPL wallet address (r-address). If provided, adds RLUSD and USDC on XRPL checks."),
        bitcoinWallet: z.string().optional().describe("Bitcoin address. If provided, adds Bitcoin Holdings dimension (native BTC balance check)."),
        proof: z.enum(["merkle"]).optional().describe("Set to 'merkle' for EIP-1186 Merkle storage proofs on stablecoin/governance checks (6 credits)."),
      },
      async (args) => {
        const result = await apiCall("POST", "/trust", args);
        return formatResult(result);
      }
    );
  • Handler for insumer_wallet_trust. Delegates to apiCall('POST', '/trust', args) then formats the result via formatResult().
    async (args) => {
      const result = await apiCall("POST", "/trust", args);
      return formatResult(result);
    }
  • Input schema for insumer_wallet_trust using Zod: wallet (required), solanaWallet, xrplWallet, bitcoinWallet (optional), and proof ('merkle' optional).
    {
      wallet: z.string().describe("EVM wallet address (0x...) to profile"),
      solanaWallet: z.string().optional().describe("Solana wallet address (base58). If provided, adds USDC on Solana check."),
      xrplWallet: z.string().optional().describe("XRPL wallet address (r-address). If provided, adds RLUSD and USDC on XRPL checks."),
      bitcoinWallet: z.string().optional().describe("Bitcoin address. If provided, adds Bitcoin Holdings dimension (native BTC balance check)."),
      proof: z.enum(["merkle"]).optional().describe("Set to 'merkle' for EIP-1186 Merkle storage proofs on stablecoin/governance checks (6 credits)."),
    },
  • Shared helper function apiCall() used by the handler to make authenticated POST requests to the Insumer API. Sends X-API-Key header and returns JSON response.
    async function apiCall(
      method: string,
      path: string,
      body?: Record<string, unknown>
    ): Promise<{ ok: boolean; data?: unknown; error?: unknown; meta?: unknown }> {
      if (!apiKey) {
        return { ok: false, error: "INSUMER_API_KEY is not set. Call the insumer_setup tool to generate a free API key instantly, then add it to your MCP config as INSUMER_API_KEY and restart." };
      }
      const url = `${API_BASE}${path}`;
      const res = await fetch(url, {
        method,
        headers: {
          "Content-Type": "application/json",
          "X-API-Key": apiKey,
        },
        body: body ? JSON.stringify(body) : undefined,
      });
      return res.json() as Promise<{
        ok: boolean;
        data?: unknown;
        error?: unknown;
        meta?: unknown;
      }>;
    }
  • Shared helper function formatResult() that wraps API responses into MCP content blocks, setting isError for failed responses.
    function formatResult(result: {
      ok: boolean;
      data?: unknown;
      error?: unknown;
      meta?: unknown;
    }) {
      if (result.ok) {
        return {
          content: [{ type: "text" as const, text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }],
        };
      }
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text" as const, text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }],
        isError: true,
      };
    }
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns 'per-dimension pass/fail counts and overall summary,' emphasizes 'No score, no opinion — just cryptographically verifiable evidence,' and mentions cost (3 or 6 credits). It does not explicitly state it is read-only but implies it via 'no opinion' and the nature of trust profiles. The absence of destructive hint is not misleading. Overall, it provides strong behavioral context beyond the schema.

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, well-organized paragraph. The first sentence states the main function. Subsequent sentences systematically enumerate checks, return values, and cost. Every sentence adds unique information with no redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

The tool has moderate complexity (5 parameters, optional multi-chain wallets). The description covers the overall process, supported assets, and return summary. Without an output schema, it provides a high-level description of what is returned ('per-dimension pass/fail counts and overall summary'). However, it lacks exact output format details (e.g., JSON structure, field names). Given the absence of output schema, the description is nearly complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that optional wallet parameters add specific checks (e.g., Solana adds USDC on Solana). It also clarifies the 'proof' parameter's effect (merkle proof costs 6 credits). This semantic enrichment justifies a score above baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description starts with a clear verb ('Generate') and specific resource ('wallet trust fact profile'). It enumerates the exact checks (36 base checks across stablecoins, governance, NFTs, staking) and distinguishes itself from siblings like insumer_batch_wallet_trust by implying a single-wallet operation. The purpose is highly specific and differentiated.

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 states it is 'Designed for AI agent-to-agent trust decisions,' providing context for use. However, it does not explicitly compare against sibling tools like insumer_batch_wallet_trust, nor does it specify when not to use it or list alternatives. The usage is implied but lacks exclusion guidance.

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/douglasborthwick-crypto/mcp-server-insumer'

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