Starknet MCP Server

get_starknet_profile

Retrieve the full Starknet ID profile for a given address or Starknet ID, including identity data.

Instructions

Get the full Starknet ID profile for an address or Starknet ID

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": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "get_starknet_profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`address`	Yes	Starknet address or Starknet ID to lookup
`network`	No	Network name (e.g., 'mainnet', 'sepolia'). Defaults to Mainnet.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Apr 19, 2025

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description only restates the basic purpose. It does not disclose what 'full profile' includes, authentication needs, or any side effects. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with key information. No wasted words.

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?

Despite high schema coverage, the description omits important context like what constitutes a Starknet ID profile, expected return format, and prerequisites. Without output schema, the agent cannot predict the result.

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 descriptions cover both parameters fully (100% coverage). The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides, hence baseline score of 3.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'full Starknet ID profile', and the input (address or Starknet ID). Distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on balances, transactions, blocks, etc.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus related siblings like 'resolve_starknet_address' or 'resolve_starknet_name'. The description does not specify context or alternatives.

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