Skip to main content
Glama
lnfi-network

RGB Lightning Network MCP Server

by lnfi-network

rgb_check_indexer_url

Validate indexer URL functionality to ensure proper connectivity for RGB asset operations on the Lightning Network.

Instructions

Check if an indexer URL is valid

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
indexerUrlYesThe indexer URL to check

Implementation Reference

  • src/server.ts:286-301 (registration)
    Registration of the 'rgb_check_indexer_url' tool, including input schema and inline handler function that calls the RGB client wrapper and formats the response.
    server.tool(
      'rgb_check_indexer_url',
      'Check if an indexer URL is valid',
      {
        indexerUrl: z.string().describe('The indexer URL to check'),
      },
      async ({ indexerUrl }) => {
        try {
          const result = await rgbClient.checkIndexerUrl(indexerUrl);
          return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }] };
        } catch (error) {
          const errorMessage = error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error);
          return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Error: ${errorMessage}` }], isError: true };
        }
      }
    );
  • The handler function for the tool that executes the logic: calls rgbClient.checkIndexerUrl, serializes result to JSON, handles errors.
      async ({ indexerUrl }) => {
        try {
          const result = await rgbClient.checkIndexerUrl(indexerUrl);
          return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }] };
        } catch (error) {
          const errorMessage = error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error);
          return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Error: ${errorMessage}` }], isError: true };
        }
      }
    );
  • Input schema using Zod for validating the 'indexerUrl' parameter.
    {
      indexerUrl: z.string().describe('The indexer URL to check'),
  • Helper method in RGBApiClientWrapper that wraps the underlying SDK call to node.checkIndexerUrl.
      async checkIndexerUrl(indexerUrl: string) {
        return await this.client.node.checkIndexerUrl({ indexer_url: indexerUrl });
      }
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'checks if an indexer URL is valid,' implying a read-only validation operation, but doesn't detail what 'valid' means (e.g., format, connectivity, authentication), potential side effects, or error handling. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 a single, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff or redundancy. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the core function, making it highly concise and well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'valid' entails, the return format (e.g., boolean, status details), or error conditions. For a validation tool with no structured behavioral data, this leaves critical gaps in understanding how to interpret results.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'indexerUrl' documented as 'The indexer URL to check.' The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as examples or constraints. Given the high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema already provides adequate parameter information.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('check') and resource ('indexer URL'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this validation tool from its siblings (like rgb_get_node_info or rgb_get_network_info), which also retrieve information but about different resources, so it misses the highest mark for sibling distinction.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, such as needing a valid indexer URL format, or compare it to siblings like rgb_get_node_info for broader system checks. This lack of context leaves the agent without usage direction.

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/lnfi-network/rgb-mcp-server'

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