Skip to main content
Glama
getpara
by getpara

create_wallet

Create an MPC wallet for EVM, Solana, or Cosmos blockchains using Multi-Party Computation. Specify network type and user identifier to generate secure keys asynchronously.

Instructions

Create an MPC wallet via Para. The wallet is created asynchronously — status starts as "creating" and transitions to "ready" once key generation completes. Use wait_for_wallet_ready to poll until ready.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesBlockchain network type
userIdentifierYesUser identifier (email, phone, or custom ID)
userIdentifierTypeYesType of user identifier
schemeNoSignature scheme (defaults based on wallet type: DKLS for EVM, ED25519 for SOLANA)
cosmosPrefixNoBech32 prefix for Cosmos wallets (e.g. "cosmos")

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function executes the tool logic for create_wallet by calling the Para API.
    export async function handler(client: ParaClient, args: Record<string, unknown>) {
      const body: CreateWalletRequest = {
        type: args.type as CreateWalletRequest['type'],
        userIdentifier: args.userIdentifier as string,
        userIdentifierType: args.userIdentifierType as CreateWalletRequest['userIdentifierType'],
        ...(args.scheme ? { scheme: args.scheme as CreateWalletRequest['scheme'] } : {}),
        ...(args.cosmosPrefix ? { cosmosPrefix: args.cosmosPrefix as string } : {}),
      };
    
      const result = await client.requestWithRetry<CreateWalletResponse>('/v1/wallets', {
        method: 'POST',
        body,
      });
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text' as const,
            text: JSON.stringify(
              {
                ...result,
                _note:
                  result.wallet.status === 'creating'
                    ? 'Wallet is being created asynchronously. Use wait_for_wallet_ready to poll until status is "ready" and the address is available.'
                    : undefined,
                _security:
                  'This wallet uses MPC — the private key never exists in a single place. Para holds one key share, you hold nothing. Signing requires calling sign_raw which triggers a distributed signing ceremony.',
              },
              null,
              2,
            ),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • The input schema definition for the create_wallet tool.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object' as const,
      properties: {
        type: {
          type: 'string',
          enum: ['EVM', 'SOLANA', 'COSMOS'],
          description: 'Blockchain network type',
        },
        userIdentifier: {
          type: 'string',
          description: 'User identifier (email, phone, or custom ID)',
        },
        userIdentifierType: {
          type: 'string',
          enum: ['EMAIL', 'PHONE', 'CUSTOM_ID', 'GUEST_ID', 'TELEGRAM', 'DISCORD', 'TWITTER'],
          description: 'Type of user identifier',
        },
        scheme: {
          type: 'string',
          enum: ['DKLS', 'CGGMP', 'ED25519'],
          description: 'Signature scheme (defaults based on wallet type: DKLS for EVM, ED25519 for SOLANA)',
        },
        cosmosPrefix: {
          type: 'string',
          description: 'Bech32 prefix for Cosmos wallets (e.g. "cosmos")',
        },
      },
      required: ['type', 'userIdentifier', 'userIdentifierType'],
    },
  • The TypeScript/Zod schema for the CreateWallet request body.
    export const CreateWalletRequestSchema = z.object({
      type: WalletTypeSchema,
      userIdentifier: z.string().min(1),
      userIdentifierType: UserIdentifierTypeSchema,
      scheme: SignatureSchemeSchema.optional(),
      cosmosPrefix: z.string().optional(),
    });
    export type CreateWalletRequest = z.infer<typeof CreateWalletRequestSchema>;
  • The TypeScript/Zod schema for the CreateWallet response body.
    export const CreateWalletResponseSchema = z.object({
      wallet: WalletSchema,
      scheme: z.string().optional(),
    });
    export type CreateWalletResponse = z.infer<typeof CreateWalletResponseSchema>;
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: the asynchronous nature of wallet creation, the initial status ('creating'), transition to 'ready', and the need for polling with wait_for_wallet_ready. It doesn't cover aspects like rate limits, error handling, or authentication needs, but the disclosed information is valuable.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by essential behavioral details in two concise sentences. Every sentence earns its place by adding critical information without redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the complexity (asynchronous creation with polling), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the creation process and next steps but could improve by mentioning error states or response format. However, it covers the core context adequately.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain parameter interactions or default behaviors like scheme defaults). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Create an MPC wallet via Para') and resource ('wallet'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_wallet or list_wallets. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sign_raw or wait_for_wallet_ready in terms of purpose, which slightly reduces specificity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context on when to use this tool (for creating wallets) and explicitly mentions an alternative tool (wait_for_wallet_ready) for polling until ready. It doesn't specify when not to use it or compare with other siblings like get_wallet, but the guidance is sufficient for basic usage.

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/getpara/para-wallet-mcp'

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