Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
nwc-mcp

nwc-mcp

by llmops-pro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

nwc_get_info

Get the wallet's capabilities, supported NIP-47 methods, node pubkey, network, alias, and color to understand what it can do before operating.

Instructions

Return the connected wallet's capabilities, supported NIP-47 methods, node pubkey, network, alias, and color. Call this first in any session to discover what the wallet supports.

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": "nwc_get_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It lists the returned data fields and implies a read-only operation by saying 'call this first', but it does not explicitly state whether it mutates state, requires auth, or has side effects. For a simple info call, this is adequate but not rich.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and immediate outcome, no filler. Every word adds value.

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 parameterless info tool, the description lists return values and usage context. No output schema exists, but the field list provides sufficient expectation. Missing details like exact format of capabilities are not critical for invocation.

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 schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description does not need to explain parameters. The baseline of 4 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Return') and a specific resource (connected wallet's capabilities, methods, pubkey, network, alias, color). This distinguishes it from siblings like nwc_get_balance or nwc_list_transactions, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 explicit timing guidance ('Call this first in any session') and explains the benefit ('discover what the wallet supports'). While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when not to use, the context strongly implies it as a discovery tool before other operations.

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