Skip to main content
Glama
getAlby

Lightning Tools MCP Server

by getAlby

fiat_to_sats

Convert fiat currency amounts to satoshis (sats) for Lightning Network transactions. Enter the currency and amount to calculate the equivalent value in sats.

Instructions

Convert fiat amounts to sats

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
currencyYesthe fiat currency
amountYesamount in sats

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that converts the fiat amount to satoshis using the external 'fiat' library and returns the result as MCP content.
    async (params) => {
      const satoshi = await fiat.getSatoshiValue(params);
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: satoshi.toString(),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Zod schema defining input parameters: currency (string) and amount (number). Note: description for amount may be misleading as it's fiat amount to convert to sats.
    {
      currency: z.string().describe("the fiat currency"),
      amount: z.number().describe("amount in sats"),
    },
  • The server.tool call within registerFiatToSatsTool that registers the tool with name, description, schema, and handler.
    server.tool(
      "fiat_to_sats",
      "Convert fiat amounts to sats",
      {
        currency: z.string().describe("the fiat currency"),
        amount: z.number().describe("amount in sats"),
      },
      async (params) => {
        const satoshi = await fiat.getSatoshiValue(params);
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: satoshi.toString(),
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    );
  • src/index.ts:29-29 (registration)
    Invocation of registerFiatToSatsTool during server constructor to perform the tool registration.
    registerFiatToSatsTool(this._server);
  • Import of the registerFiatToSatsTool function.
    import { registerFiatToSatsTool } from "./tools/fiat_to_sats.js";
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the conversion action but lacks details on how the conversion works (e.g., source of exchange rates, accuracy, latency), whether it's read-only or has side effects, or any error handling. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that performs calculations.

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 with zero waste. It's front-loaded and directly communicates the core function without unnecessary elaboration, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about the conversion process (e.g., rate source, timestamp), which could be important for accurate usage. Without annotations or output schema, more detail would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for 'currency' and 'amount'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as examples or constraints (e.g., valid currency codes, amount ranges). Since the schema does the heavy lifting, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Convert fiat amounts to sats' clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('Convert') and resources ('fiat amounts' to 'sats'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'parse_invoice' or 'request_invoice', which appear to be related to Bitcoin transactions but serve different purposes.

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 any prerequisites, context for conversion (e.g., real-time rates, historical data), or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on the tool name 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

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/getAlby/lightning-tools-mcp-server'

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