Skip to main content
Glama

t2000_sentinel_list

List active AI agents with prize pools available for attack. Shows name, fee, prize amount, and attack count to identify bounty hunting opportunities.

Instructions

List active Sui Sentinels — AI agents with prize pools you can attack. Shows name, attack fee, prize pool, and attack count. Use this for bounty hunting.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Implementation of the 't2000_sentinel_list' tool handler, which fetches active Sui Sentinels using the agent SDK and formats the data for the MCP response.
    server.tool(
      't2000_sentinel_list',
      'List active Sui Sentinels — AI agents with prize pools you can attack. Shows name, attack fee, prize pool, and attack count. Use this for bounty hunting.',
      {},
      async () => {
        try {
          const sentinels = await agent.sentinelList();
          const serializable = sentinels.map(s => ({
            ...s,
            attackFee: s.attackFee.toString(),
            attackFeeSui: Number(s.attackFee) / 1e9,
            prizePool: s.prizePool.toString(),
            prizePoolSui: Number(s.prizePool) / 1e9,
          }));
          return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(serializable) }] };
        } catch (err) {
          return errorResult(err);
        }
      },
    );
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a listing operation for 'active' sentinels with specific attributes, which helps understand what data is returned. However, it doesn't mention behavioral aspects like whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, pagination, or what happens if no sentinels are active.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each earn their place: the first explains what the tool lists and what information it shows, the second provides usage context. No wasted words, well-structured and front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter listing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does a good job explaining what the tool returns (active sentinels with specific attributes) and its purpose. However, it could be more complete by mentioning the format of the return data or any limitations.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, and instead focuses on what the tool does and returns.

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 the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('List active Sui Sentinels') and resources ('AI agents with prize pools'), and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying it's for 'bounty hunting' and listing specific attributes shown (name, attack fee, prize pool, attack count). This goes beyond a simple restatement of the name.

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 clear context for when to use this tool ('for bounty hunting'), but doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name specific alternatives. It implies usage for finding targets to attack, but doesn't compare it to sibling tools like 't2000_sentinel_info' or 't2000_sentinel_attack'.

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/mission69b/t2000'

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