Skip to main content
Glama

portal_get_recent_activity

Retrieve a chronological feed of recent transactions on supported networks, with optional filtering by time range, addresses, and pagination.

Instructions

Get a simple recent-activity feed across EVM, Solana, Bitcoin, or Hyperliquid with chronological paging and investigation pivots.

COMMON USER ASKS:

  • Recent activity on Base

  • Recent Hyperliquid fills

FIRST CHOICE FOR:

  • recent activity on any supported network without manual block math

  • questions like "what has been happening on Base lately?"

  • first-pass incident triage when the user asks what happened recently on a network

WHEN TO USE:

  • You want a quick recent-activity feed for a network.

  • You want to ask what has been happening lately on a network and see the newest activity first.

  • You want the simplest starting point before reaching for raw VM-specific query tools.

  • You are investigating an incident and need a bounded, recent evidence timeline before narrowing to wallets, transfers, logs, or fills.

DON'T USE:

  • You need raw logs, instructions, or chain-specific fields that only raw query tools return.

  • You want a chart over time rather than a recent feed.

EXAMPLES:

  • Recent activity on Base: {"network":"base-mainnet","timeframe":"1h","limit":10}

  • Recent Hyperliquid fills: {"network":"hyperliquid-fills","timeframe":"1h","limit":10}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax transactions to return (max: 200)
cursorNoContinuation cursor from a previous response
networkNoNetwork name (supports short names: 'polygon', 'base', 'ethereum', 'arbitrum', etc.). Optional when continuing with cursor.
timeframeNoTime period or block count. Examples: '100' (default), '1h', '6h', '24h', '7d', '3d'.100
to_addressesNoFilter by recipient addresses
to_timestampNoEnding timestamp. Accepts Unix seconds, Unix milliseconds, ISO datetime, or relative input like "now".
from_addressesNoFilter by sender addresses
from_timestampNoStarting timestamp. Accepts Unix seconds, Unix milliseconds, ISO datetime, or relative input like "1h ago".
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions chronological paging, investigation pivots, and that it returns a recent feed. While it doesn't detail destructive behavior (unlikely), it lacks mention of rate limits or specifics about the returned data format, but is still quite transparent.

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 well-structured with clear sections, bullet points, and examples. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence earns its place without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

Given 8 parameters (0 required) and no output schema, the description covers usage guidance, examples, and parameter hints comprehensively. However, it does not describe the return format or fields, which would be helpful given the lack of output schema, so it is not fully complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value with examples clarifying the 'timeframe' and 'network' parameters ('1h', '6h', 'base-mainnet'), and explains 'cursor' for continuation, which goes beyond the schema comments.

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 verb ('Get'), the resource ('simple recent-activity feed'), and scope ('across EVM, Solana, Bitcoin, or Hyperliquid'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like portal_evm_query_transactions by emphasizing it as a high-level feed.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit instructions with 'FIRST CHOICE FOR', 'WHEN TO USE', and 'DON'T USE' sections, covering when to choose this tool over raw query tools and when to avoid it (e.g., for raw logs or charts), which is exemplary guidance.

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/subsquid-labs/portal-mcp-server'

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