Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Nodit MCP Server

Nodit MCP Server

Official
by noditlabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Call Nodit Multichain API

call_nodit_multichain_api

Calls a Nodit Multichain API operation to fetch data across multiple blockchain networks in one request, passing each {chain}-{network} target in the request body. Verify the operation spec before use.

Instructions

Calls an operation from the Nodit Multichain API category — the operations listed by 'list_nodit_multichain_apis'. These operations address several chains in one request and name them inside the request body rather than in the URL. Verify the request body shape with 'get_nodit_api_spec' before making the call. Please note that using this tool will consume your API quota.

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": {
      "operationId": "<operationId>",
      "requestBody": "<requestBody>"
    },
    "name": "call_nodit_multichain_api"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
operationIdYesMultichain API operationId to call, as listed by 'list_nodit_multichain_apis'.
requestBodyYesJSON request body matching the operation's spec from 'get_nodit_api_spec'. The target chains go inside this body as '{chain}-{network}' values.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.4.1

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, open-world, non-idempotent behavior, so the description's main contribution is the cost disclosure ('using this tool will consume your API quota'), which is exactly the kind of rate/quota context annotations cannot express. It also clarifies that chains live in the body rather than the URL, a real behavioral constraint. It stops short of describing response shape or failure modes, but with no output schema that is a minor gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose first, then the distinguishing semantics, then the prerequisite check and quota warning. Every sentence carries information, though the 'Please note that' phrasing adds slight softness to an otherwise tight definition.

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 generic API-passthrough tool with a fully documented two-parameter schema, the description covers the discovery-prerequisite workflow and the quota cost, which are the two things an agent cannot learn from structured fields. It omits return-value and error behavior, but the tool is open-world and the spec is retrievable via a sibling, so the gap is acceptable rather than blocking.

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 description coverage is 100% and the description largely restates what the schema already says: operationId comes from the list tool, requestBody must match the spec, chains are '{chain}-{network}' values in the body. It adds no validation rules, no example body, and no guidance on nested per-chain structure, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Calls an operation from the Nodit Multichain API category') and adds the defining characteristic that separates it from the single-chain sibling: 'These operations address several chains in one request and name them inside the request body rather than in the URL.' An agent can distinguish this from call_nodit_api and call_nodit_aptos_indexer_api without opening any schema.

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?

Gives an explicit pre-call workflow: get the operationId from 'list_nodit_multichain_apis' and verify the request body shape with 'get_nodit_api_spec' before calling. It does not explicitly state when to prefer the single-chain call_nodit_api instead, but the 'several chains in one request' framing makes the selection condition inferable.

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