Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
x402-wallet-mcp

x402-wallet-mcp

by kato9292929
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Check sign-in status

check_sign_in_status
Read-only

Verifies wallet provider credentials are configured and able to sign, and identifies any missing settings so you can confirm payment readiness before proceeding.

Instructions

Checks whether the wallet provider's credentials are configured and can sign, and explains what is missing if not.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "check_sign_in_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With readOnlyHint=true already covering safety, the description adds that it checks credential configuration and signing capability, and that it explains what is missing when not ready. This gives useful diagnostic context beyond annotations, though it does not describe output structure or auth requirements.

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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. It communicates the check and its failure behavior efficiently.

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?

For a simple parameterless status check with readOnlyHint, the description covers what is inspected and what happens on failure. Return format is not specified, but the diagnostic intent is adequately conveyed.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to document beyond the schema. The baseline for a parameterless tool is 4.

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 states a specific check: whether the wallet provider's credentials are configured and can sign. It clearly identifies the resource and action, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling wallet tools.

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?

Usage is implied as a diagnostic for sign-in readiness, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over siblings like get_wallet_address or get_wallet_balance. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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