Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AgentWallet MCP Server

AgentWallet MCP Server

by hifriendbot
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

transfer

Sends native tokens such as ETH, AVAX, BNB, POL, PLS, or SOL to a specified address using a human-readable amount, then signs and broadcasts the transaction.

Instructions

Send native tokens (ETH, AVAX, BNB, POL, PLS, SOL) to an address. Specify the amount in human-readable format (e.g. "0.1" for 0.1 ETH). The amount is converted to wei/lamports automatically. Signs and broadcasts the transaction.

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>",
      "to": "<to>",
      "amount": "<amount>",
      "chain_id": "<chain_id>"
    },
    "name": "transfer"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesDestination address (0x-prefixed for EVM, Base58 for Solana)
amountYesAmount to send in human-readable format (e.g. "0.1" for 0.1 ETH)
chain_idYesChain ID (1=Ethereum, 8453=Base, 42161=Arbitrum, 10=Optimism, 137=Polygon, 43114=Avalanche, 56=BSC, 7777777=Zora, 369=PulseChain, 900=Solana, 901=Solana Devnet)
wallet_idYesWallet ID to send from

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.14.8
    • addedInput schema / properties / chain_id / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • addedInput schema / properties / chain_id / minimum
      Added value: +-9007199254740991
    • addedInput schema / properties / wallet_id / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • addedInput schema / properties / wallet_id / minimum
      Added value: +-9007199254740991
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.14.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / to / pattern
      Added value: +"^(0x[a-fA-F0-9]{40}|[1-9A-HJ-NP-Za-km-z]{32,44})$"
  3. First observedv1.7.3

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the critical behavior: it "signs and broadcasts the transaction," making clear this is an irreversible on-chain mutation. It also explains the unit conversion ("converted to wei/lamports automatically"). It omits gas/fee handling, whether it waits for confirmation, and any failure modes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and asset scope, then the amount convention, then the signing behavior. Only the amount-format sentence is partly redundant with the schema.

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?

For an irreversible, annotation-free transfer tool with no output schema, the description should ideally say what comes back (transaction hash?) and whether confirmation is awaited. The signing/broadcast note is valuable but the return behavior and failure conditions are left unstated.

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 coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema, including the human-readable amount convention and the chain_id mapping. The description's note on human-readable amounts and automatic conversion merely restates what the amount field already says, adding no new semantics.

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 ("Send native tokens") and enumerates the supported assets (ETH, AVAX, BNB, POL, PLS, SOL). The word "native" implicitly separates it from the sibling transfer_token, but no sibling is named, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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 "native tokens" framing implies when to use this over transfer_token, and listing supported chains implies scope. However, there is no explicit statement of when NOT to use it, no prerequisite checks (balance, wallet paused state), and no routing to alternatives.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools