AgentWallet MCP Server

get_wallet

Retrieve wallet details by ID to access address, label, chain, spending limits, and pause status for on-chain operations.

Instructions

Get details for a specific wallet by ID. Returns address, label, chain, spending limits, and pause status.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "wallet_id": "<wallet_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_wallet"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`wallet_id`	Yes	Wallet ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.14.8Oct 27, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / wallet_id / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
- addedInput schema / properties / wallet_id / minimum
```
Added value: +-9007199254740991
```
First observedv1.7.3Mar 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation and the description lists returned fields, which adds useful context, but it does not explicitly confirm no side effects, auth requirements, or behavior for invalid/missing wallet IDs.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler: the first states purpose and second lists return values. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 is simple: one required ID parameter, no output schema. The description covers ID scope and enumerates return fields, making it largely complete. Missing error/permission nuance keeps it from a full 5.

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% for the sole wallet_id parameter ('Wallet ID'). The description adds only the 'by ID' scope and returned fields, not additional meaning or format details for the parameter itself; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get details for a specific wallet') scoped by ID, and enumerates returned fields. It is distinguishable from list_wallets by the specific-ID scope, though it does not explicitly name siblings like get_balance or list_wallets.

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?

Implies usage when details for a known wallet ID are needed, but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this vs list_wallets or get_balance, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The usage context is only implied.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.