Skip to main content
Glama

resolve_token

Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolve a token symbol on a supported chain to its canonical contract address and decimals, surfacing native-versus-bridged ambiguity to prevent silent selection errors.

Instructions

Resolve a (chain, symbol) pair to its canonical contract address + decimals from the curated registry. Supports EVM chains (ethereum, arbitrum, polygon, base, optimism), Solana, and TRON. Surfaces native-vs-bridged ambiguity verbatim — e.g. asking for USDC on Arbitrum returns the native Circle USDC contract AND a hasBridgedVariant warning with the USDC.e legacy-bridged contract in alternatives[], so the agent can offer the user the actual choice instead of silently picking one. Asking for USDC.e directly returns the bridged contract with an isBridgedVariant warning + the native USDC alternative. Same shape on Polygon/Optimism (USDC.e) and Base (USDbC is the bridged form there). By design, this tool is canonical-registry-only — it does NOT probe on-chain to resolve unknown symbols, since an attacker can deploy a contract that returns "USDC" from symbol() and is wholly unrelated to the real Circle stablecoin. Unknown symbols throw with a list of registry hits on that chain so the agent can suggest the right one. USE THIS BEFORE prepare_token_send when the user names a token by symbol — surface any warnings to the user before passing the resolved contract through to prepare_token_send. If the desired token isn't in the registry, look up the contract on a block explorer and call prepare_token_send directly with the explicit address.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainYesChain the symbol is on. Restricted to the chains with curated token tables. BTC + LTC have no token concept and aren't accepted.
symbolYesToken symbol to resolve (case-insensitive, but the canonical-registry key casing wins on output). Examples: "USDC", "USDC.e", "USDbC", "WETH", "BONK". The resolver does NOT probe on-chain — only canonical-registry hits succeed, by design (stops phishing-token symbol collisions from being resolved silently).
Behavior5/5

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

Description reveals key behaviors beyond annotations: canonical-registry-only, no on-chain probing, bridged variant warnings, and error handling with suggestions. Annotations indicate readOnly and idempotent, which description reinforces.

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?

Concise while covering main purpose, edge cases, and usage guidance. Front-loaded with core function, then details, then actionable advice. No wasted sentences.

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?

Given complexity (multi-chain, bridged tokens, no output schema), description fully prepares the agent: what to expect, how to handle ambiguity, unknown tokens, and integration with sibling tool. Complete for safe usage.

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%, but description adds value with examples, case-insensitivity note, and explanation of registry-only resolution. This supplements schema meaningfully.

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 'Resolve a (chain, symbol) pair to its canonical contract address + decimals from the curated registry.' It specifies supported chains and highlights ambiguity handling, distinguishing it from tools like `prepare_token_send`.

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?

Explicitly advises 'USE THIS BEFORE `prepare_token_send` when the user names a token by symbol' and provides guidance for unknown symbols, including alternatives like calling `prepare_token_send` with explicit address.

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/szhygulin/recon-crypto-mcp'

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