Neo N3 MCP Server

get_nep11_balances

Retrieve NEP-11 non-fungible token balances for any Neo N3 address on mainnet or testnet.

Instructions

Get NEP-11 balances for an address.

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_nep11_balances"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`address`	Yes	Neo N3 address
`network`	No	Network to use: "mainnet" or "testnet"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv2.0.0May 4, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It does not mention rate limits, authentication, output format, or any side effects. The brief sentence 'Get NEP-11 balances for an address' provides minimal transparency.

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 sentence, front-loaded, and contains no extraneous information. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally complete but lacks details on return type, error handling, or example usage. It could mention that balances are returned as a list of token data.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema descriptions. It does not elaborate on the parameters (e.g., address format, network enumeration). Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 fetches NEP-11 balances for an address, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_balance (NEP-17) and get_nep11_transfers (transfers vs balances).

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 alternatives, no prerequisites, exclusions, or context provided. The description only says what it does without any usage direction.

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