cabal-hunter-mcp
This server performs real-time on-chain cabal and rug detection for Solana tokens via a single tool: check_cabal_risk({ mint }).
Scan any Solana token mint address to receive:
Exit-Liquidity Risk Verdict:
SAFE,REVIEW, orAVOIDCabal Score (0–100): Quantifies coordinated wallet activity
Funding-Cluster Detection: Identifies wallets funded from the same master wallet, with collective supply percentages
Same-Block Jito-Bundle Detection: Flags coordinated same-block buys indicating bundled sniping
Coordinated Dump Detection: Detects multiple holders dumping simultaneously
Serial Rugger Deployer History: Shows tokens launched vs. abandoned (e.g., "launched 14, 13 dead")
Honeypot Check: Detects freeze authority status and Token-2022 traps that could prevent selling
On-Chain Evidence Links: Every flag links to a Solscan transaction for verification
Agent-Friendly Output: Returns
scan_complete,wallets_checked, verdict, and cabal score so agents can gate buys automatically
Free tier: 250 scans/month per IP, no API key required. An optional CABAL_HUNTER_API_KEY header unlocks higher limits. Also available via REST API, ElizaOS plugin, and an interactive bubble map.
Scans Solana token mints for cabal risk, funding-cluster detection, Jito-bundle detection, coordinated-dump detection, serial-rug deployer history, and honeypot checks, providing an exit-liquidity risk verdict.
Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@cabal-hunter-mcpScan token mint 7GCihg... for cabal risk"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
cabal-hunter-mcp
On-chain Solana cabal & rug detection as an MCP server. One tool — check_cabal_risk — scans any Solana token mint before your agent buys and returns an Exit-Liquidity Risk verdict (SAFE | REVIEW | AVOID), a 0–100 cabal score, funding-cluster detection, same-block Jito-bundle detection, coordinated-dump detection, serial-launcher deployer history ("launched 14, 13 dead"), and a Solana-native honeypot check (freeze authority + Token-2022 traps). Every flag links to its on-chain evidence transaction.
🌐 Available in 9 languages: English · Español · Português · Français · Deutsch · Nederlands · 中文 · 日本語 · 한국어
Contract-clean is not cabal-clean. A basic scanner tells you the mint/freeze/LP are fine — it doesn't tell you that 15 wallets funded from one source are holding 30% of supply, waiting to dump on you.
Credit where it's due: RugCheck also does same-source wallet clustering (their "Insider Networks"), and it's a good tool — if it does what you need, genuinely, use it. What this gives you is one fused exit-liquidity verdict in a single call, at $9/month with no account.
Quick start
npx cabal-hunter-mcpNo install, no signup — 5 free scans/month, or 250/month with a free key (one email). That's the whole setup; the command below is what you drop into any MCP client.
Claude Desktop / Claude Code / Cursor / VS Code / ElizaOS

{
"mcpServers": {
"cabal-hunter": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "cabal-hunter-mcp"]
}
}
}Prefer a remote HTTP server (no local process)? Point straight at the hosted endpoint instead:
{ "mcpServers": { "cabal-hunter": { "url": "https://api.cabal-hunter.com/mcp" } } }Related MCP server: token-rugcheck
The tool
check_cabal_risk({ mint }) — pass a Solana token mint (contract) address. Returns the full forensic JSON:
{
"recommendation": "AVOID", // SAFE | REVIEW | AVOID ← the headline
"risk": "HIGH", // exit-liquidity risk
"cabal_score": 100, // 0-100
"honeypot_risk": "LOW", // freeze authority + Token-2022 traps
"mint_authority_revoked": true,
"freeze_authority_revoked": true,
"deployer": { "verdict": "SERIAL_LAUNCHER", "tokens_launched": 14, "dead": 13 },
"coordinated_clusters": [
{ "wallets": 5, "combined_pct": 23.1, "evidence_tx": "https://solscan.io/tx/…" }
],
"time_sync": true, // same-block (Jito-bundled) buys
"coordinated_exit": false, // ≥2 holders dumped together
"top_reasons": ["..."],
"wallets_checked": 15,
"scan_complete": true
}scan_complete / wallets_checked are included on purpose so your agent can apply its own risk tolerance instead of inheriting ours — the score is a starting point you can verify (every cluster carries an evidence_tx), not a verdict you take on faith.
Gate a buy in your agent
"Before buying any token, call
check_cabal_riskwith the mint. IfrecommendationisAVOIDorcabal_score >= 65orhoneypot_riskisHIGH, skip the trade and say why."
A note on the withdrawn trace_funding tool
An earlier version of this README documented a second tool, trace_funding, that traced a token's first buyers back to their funding source. It has been withdrawn. This section is the full record of why, including the parts that make us look bad, because a detector nobody can audit is worth nothing.
The first artifact (July 14). Its headline detections were not real. The "shared funder" it reported was frequently the token's own pump.fun bonding curve: every seller receives SOL back from the curve, so ordinary selling was being reported as a coordinated cluster. A user caught it by checking one of our findings against an independent tool. We were wrong and the other tool was right.
The second artifact (July 26) — the same bug wearing a different hat. Excluding the bonding curve fixed one address, not the class of mistake. Measuring 323 launches showed an apparent 15% detection rate that was also an artifact: 17 of the 22 flagged "funders" were the liquidity pool's wrapped-SOL vault, which likewise pays out to anyone who sells. Two fingerprints gave it away — 192 of 193 "clusters" had every member already exited, because the group was, by construction, a list of people who had sold. Checking the flagged address against the listed pair address returns a clean bill of health here, and that clean bill is wrong: the vault is a different address from the pair. The real fix is a class rule — only a System-owned account can be a person.
Then we found we had been measuring the wrong moment entirely. The trace took its launch timestamp from the token's listed pair, but for a graduated token the only listed pair is the post-graduation one. So every measurement we had ever taken — including the ones above — described buyers at graduation, not at launch. The actual claim, that a deployer pre-funds wallets which snipe the mint, had never been tested at all.
The real test. We rebuilt it against the bonding curve itself, which is where a launch actually happens, and fixed the coverage problem that had been skipping most tokens. Result on the correct window, with the artifact removed: zero coordinated clusters across 25 launches, 18 of which had enough buyers for a cluster to be possible.
What we found instead is more interesting. On one representative launch, 1,260 of the bonding curve's 1,266 transactions failed. The median launch has about five successful buyers. These launches are not quietly accumulating cabals — they are sniper races where hundreds of bots compete and a handful win. Because a launch has so few winners, tracing the top ten covers essentially all of them, which makes that zero a strong result rather than a thin sample.
We would rather withdraw a feature than ship a detector that has never demonstrably detected anything. It may return if a real signal can be shown; until then it is not advertised and not billed. The scanning that check_cabal_risk does — holder concentration, same-block bundles, coordinated dumps, deployer track record, honeypot and exit-liquidity checks — is a separate code path that was never affected by any of this, and it carries the System-owned rule described above.
Pricing
5 scans/month free with no account, or 250/month with a free key (one email).
After that: $9/month for Unlimited (fair use), or pay-as-you-go at $0.001 per scan (priced at cost). Pay by card, in USDC on Solana, or via x402 — same price through every door. Card subscriptions renew automatically and can be cancelled anytime at cabal-hunter.com/billing.
Prepaid key: send USDC,
POST /api/buy-key, then setCABAL_HUNTER_API_KEY(sent as theX-API-Keyheader). Full details: api.cabal-hunter.com/pricing.
Configuration
Env var | Default | Purpose |
| (none) | Prepaid key for unlimited / metered use ( |
|
| Override the API base URL. |
Other ways to use Cabal-Hunter
REST:
curl "https://api.cabal-hunter.com/api/scan-cabal?mintAddress=<MINT>"— OpenAPI specElizaOS plugin:
elizaos-plugin-cabal-hunter(npm install elizaos-plugin-cabal-hunter)MCP template / starter: solana-safe-sniper-mcp-template
Human? Free interactive 3D holder map — holders as crystals sized by supply share, clusters joined by beams, with wallets, Solscan receipts, live chart + trade links on one screen: api.cabal-hunter.com/map
What it detects (why "contract-clean" misses it)
A cabal is 15 fresh wallets — all funded from the same master wallet, all buying in the first seconds of launch — quietly accumulating 25–40% of supply before your bot sees the first candle. Contract clean. LP burned. Everything green. Then they dump, simultaneously, into your liquidity. Cabal-Hunter traces the funding graph on-chain and answers the only question that matters before you sign a swap: are you the exit liquidity?
MIT licensed. Powered by Cabal-Hunter. This package is a thin MCP wrapper over the hosted API — the detection runs server-side against live Solana on-chain data (Helius RPC).
Available Tools
1 toolcheck_cabal_riskA
Real-time on-chain coordinated-wallet (cabal) and rug detection for any Solana token mint. One call returns an Exit-Liquidity Risk verdict (SAFE | REVIEW | AVOID), a 0-100 cabal score, funding-cluster detection (top holders funded by the same source), same-block Jito-bundle detection, coordinated-dump detection, serial-rug deployer history (e.g. 'launched 14, 13 dead'), a honeypot check (freeze authority + Token-2022 traps), and on-chain evidence transactions for every flag. Use it before an agent buys a pump.fun / PumpSwap / Raydium token to answer: are you the exit liquidity? Free: 250 scans/month, no API key required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mint | Yes | The Solana token mint (contract) address to scan, e.g. DezXAZ8z7PnrnRJjz3wXBoRgixCa6xjnB7YaB1pPB263 |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses all major behavioral traits: what it detects (cabal score, funding clusters, Jito-bundle, coordinated-dump, serial rug history, honeypot), the evidence returned, and rate limits (250 scans/month, no API key). No annotations exist, so the description fully carries the burden.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is relatively long but well-structured: it opens with the core purpose, enumerates all detection components, and concludes with usage guidance. Every sentence adds value, though some redundancy exists (e.g., 'rug detection' and 'serial-rug deployer').
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complexity of the tool (multiple detection types, no output schema), the description is extremely complete. It covers all detection mechanisms, the output verdict, evidence details, and practical usage context, ensuring an agent can select and invoke the tool appropriately.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There is only one parameter ('mint') with full schema coverage (100%). The description adds an example address but no further semantic value beyond what the schema provides. This meets the baseline of 3.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: real-time on-chain coordinated-wallet and rug detection for Solana token mints. It specifies the exact output (Exit-Liquidity Risk verdict, cabal score, detection details) and the target use case (pump.fun, PumpSwap, Raydium tokens).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly tells when to use the tool: 'before an agent buys a ... token to answer: are you the exit liquidity?' It also mentions the free tier (250 scans/month) but does not discuss when not to use or alternatives (though no siblings exist).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
1 tool update
v0.1.0- First observed
check_cabal_risk
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The single tool's purpose is clearly defined.
A single tool named 'check_cabal_risk' uses a clear verb_noun pattern. There are no other tools to introduce inconsistency.
The server has only one tool, which feels minimal for a general risk-checking service. While the tool itself is comprehensive, a broader set could include additional analytical or comparison tools.
The single tool covers all stated detection needs—exit liquidity, cabal scoring, funding clusters, bundle detection, dump detection, deployer history, and honeypot checks—in one call. It fully addresses its domain.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
RiskDataApi — Solana token risk scoring for AI agents. Safety score, insider clusters, honeypot.
Solana address risk grades and token scans for AI agents. Pay-per-call via x402 (USDC on Base).
Solana on-chain intelligence — token scans, wallet profiling, bundle detection, 19 MCP tools.
Solana token safety for AI agents — rug-pull, honeypot & Token-2022 trap detection before you buy.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that detects potential risks in Solana meme tokens, helping AI agents avoid rug pulls and unsafe projects.21MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceMCP server for real-time Solana token risk analysis. Cross-references RugCheck.xyz, DexScreener, and GoPlus Security to generate three-layer reports: machine verdict → LLM analysis → raw on-chain evidence. Live on Solana mainnet with USDC micropayments ($0.02/audit). Give any AI agent the ability to check if a token is safe before trading.2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceOn-chain Solana token safety for trading agents — traces coordinated wallet funding, same-block Jito bundles, serial-rug deployers and live coordinated dumps into one Exit-Liquidity Risk verdict before a swap. Free tier, then $0.02 USDC/query via x402.1201MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that detects potential risks in Solana meme tokens using Solsniffer API, helping AI agents avoid rug pulls and unsafe projects.MIT