Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MicroTap-MCP

MicroTap-MCP

by swaltersjrtest
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Native + ERC-20 wallet balance

get_wallet_balance
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve native token balance for any EVM wallet address, plus an optional ERC-20 token balance, across Base, Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, or Optimism.

Instructions

Native token balance for a wallet address, plus an optional specific ERC-20 token balance, across Base, Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, or Optimism. Price: $0.002 per call.

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_wallet_balance"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainNoChain to query (default base)
tokenNoOptional ERC-20 token contract address to also check
addressYesEVM wallet address (0x...)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: that the call costs $0.002, supports five specific chains with a default, and optionally checks an ERC-20 token. These details go beyond annotations, though the return format (e.g., wei vs ether) is not disclosed.

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 plus a cost note, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the input purpose and constraints. However, without an output schema, the description should ideally hint at the return format (e.g., numeric value in wei) to fully inform the agent. This omission leaves a gap in completeness.

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% with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The description confirms the purpose of the parameters (native balance + optional ERC-20) but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. The cost note is not parameter-specific. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 balance'), resource ('wallet address'), and scope ('native token plus optional ERC-20 token across 5 chains'). This definitively distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_crypto_price or get_crypto_market_data, which serve different purposes.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage (if you need a wallet balance, use this tool), but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it. No alternative tools are named or excluded, leaving usage guidance implicit.

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