Skip to main content
Glama

portal_resolve_entity

Resolve token symbols, contract aliases, or Hyperliquid coin names into deterministic addresses and filters for blockchain queries.

Instructions

Resolve user-facing blockchain entities into query-ready identifiers, with ambiguity kept explicit.

COMMON USER ASKS:

  • Resolve USDC on Base

  • Resolve WETH on Ethereum

  • Resolve BAYC contract

FIRST CHOICE FOR:

  • resolving a token symbol like USDC to token contract addresses

  • resolving EVM contract aliases, protocol names, pool identifiers, or Hyperliquid coin names before querying

  • checking which token-list addresses a symbol maps to before querying logs or transfers

  • turning a user-friendly token name into deterministic EVM filters

WHEN TO USE:

  • The user names a token symbol such as USDC, WETH, DAI, or PEPE and you need contract addresses before querying raw data.

  • The user names a well-known EVM contract, protocol, pool identifier, or Hyperliquid ticker and you need a deterministic follow-up filter.

  • You need to disambiguate bridged token variants on an EVM network.

  • You want a source-backed token address rather than relying on memory or hardcoded constants.

DON'T USE:

  • You already have the exact address, pool id, protocol slug, or coin filter and can pass it directly.

EXAMPLES:

  • Resolve USDC on Base: {"network":"base-mainnet","kind":"token","query":"USDC","limit":10}

  • Resolve WETH on Ethereum: {"network":"ethereum-mainnet","kind":"token","query":"WETH","limit":5}

  • Resolve BAYC contract: {"network":"ethereum-mainnet","kind":"contract","query":"bored apes"}

  • Resolve Hyperliquid coin: {"kind":"hyperliquid_coin","query":"bitcoin"}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNoEntity kind to resolve: token, contract alias/address, pool identifier, protocol name, or Hyperliquid coin/ticker.token
limitNoMaximum matches to return.
queryYesEntity string to resolve, e.g. "USDC", "bayc", "uniswap", "BTC", or "0x...".
networkNoNetwork name or alias when the entity is network-scoped, e.g. "base", "ethereum", "arbitrum-one", or "hyperliquid-fills".
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the basic behavior but does not disclose side effects, rate limits, or idempotency. It mentions 'ambiguity kept explicit' but does not elaborate how.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections, though there is some overlap between 'FIRST CHOICE FOR' and 'WHEN TO USE'. Generally concise and front-loaded with the main purpose.

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?

The description is comprehensive enough for an AI agent to decide when to use this tool and how to invoke it, covering purpose, usage guidelines, and examples. No output schema is needed, and the inputs are fully covered.

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%, so the parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds usage context through examples but does not introduce new semantic details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 resolves user-facing blockchain entities into query-ready identifiers, explicitly listing common asks and differentiating from sibling tools that query blockchain data directly.

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 sections for when to use (e.g., resolving token symbols, contract aliases) and when not to use (e.g., if exact address is already known), giving clear guidance on alternatives.

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