Skip to main content
Glama
fakepixels

Base Network MCP Server

by fakepixels

list_wallets

Retrieve a list of all available wallets on the Base Network MCP Server for managing blockchain operations via natural language commands.

Instructions

List all available wallets

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The main execution logic for the 'list_wallets' tool. Calls getAllWallets() and formats the response with success message and wallet list.
    function handleListWallets(): any {
      try {
        const wallets = getAllWallets();
        
        return {
          success: true,
          message: `Found ${wallets.length} wallet(s)`,
          wallets: wallets.map(wallet => ({
            name: wallet.name,
            address: wallet.address
          }))
        };
      } catch (error) {
        console.error('Error listing wallets:', error);
        throw error;
      }
    }
  • Input schema definition for the 'list_wallets' tool (no input parameters required) as part of the MCP ListTools response.
      name: 'list_wallets',
      description: 'List all available wallets',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {},
      },
    },
  • MCP CallTool request handler registration that invokes the list_wallets handler and returns the result as text content.
    case 'list_wallets': {
      const result = toolHandlers.handleListWallets();
      
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
  • Helper function that retrieves all wallets from the in-memory walletStore.
    export function getAllWallets(): Wallet[] {
      return Object.values(walletStore);
    }
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. 'List all available wallets' implies a read-only operation that returns wallet identifiers or metadata, but it doesn't specify critical behaviors: whether it requires authentication, returns paginated results, includes deleted/inactive wallets, or has rate limits. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it 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, efficient sentence ('List all available wallets') that front-loads the core action and resource. It wastes no words on redundancy or fluff, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place by directly contributing to understanding the tool's function.

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

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks context about the return format (e.g., list of wallet names, IDs, or full objects), error conditions, or integration with sibling tools. For a basic list operation, this might suffice, but it doesn't provide enough detail for confident use in complex scenarios.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate here. A baseline of 4 is given because the schema fully documents the lack of parameters, and the description doesn't need to compensate—it correctly focuses on the tool's purpose rather than unnecessary parameter explanations.

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 'List all available wallets' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('wallets'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_wallet' (creation vs listing) and 'check_balance' (listing vs querying specific data), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'process_command' which is more ambiguous. The description is specific enough to understand the tool's function without being tautological.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether wallets must exist), compare it to siblings like 'check_balance' (which might list balances rather than wallets), or specify scenarios where listing is appropriate (e.g., before selecting a wallet for another operation). The agent must infer usage from the tool name and context alone.

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/fakepixels/base-mcp-server'

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