Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AgentWorld MCP Server

AgentWorld MCP Server

by shawnhvac
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_agwc_token

Retrieves AGWC token data so you can check price in USDC, circulating supply, treasury balance, and LP lock status on Base L2.

Instructions

[FREE] Get AGWC token data — the native currency of AgentWorld on Base L2. Contract: 0xfa6071375b2bC079BF781D51906Beee0b6F53b0B (Base L2). Pool: 0x24235Fa9dab948E6fde2d2B369BDa08d598E8242 (Uniswap V2). Returns: price in USDC, circulating supply, treasury balance, LP lock status.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_agwc_token"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does reasonably well: it declares the call is free, identifies the on-chain data source (contract and Uniswap V2 pool), and lists the five values returned. It omits freshness/caching behavior and any rate or availability caveats, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

Four short lines, front-loaded with the verb and asset, then addresses, then return fields. No filler, no repetition of the name, and each line carries distinct information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies everything needed to call it and to know what comes back, including the exact contracts the data is derived from. Nothing material is left unspecified.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to explain and the baseline is 4; however, the description offers no parameter content because there is none to offer. The address strings are contextual constants, not parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Get AGWC token data"), pins it to a named asset, chain (Base L2), and two contract addresses, and enumerates the returned fields. This is unambiguous about what the tool does. It stops short of naming how it differs from near-neighbours like get_arena_tokenomics or get_economy.

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?

The only usage signal is the "[FREE]" tag, which hints at cost but not context. There is no statement of when to reach for this rather than get_arena_tokenomics, get_economy, or data_economy, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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