Skip to main content
Glama
tywenk

Model Context Protocol Server for Solana Client

by tywenk

get_signatures_for_address

Retrieve confirmed transaction signatures associated with a Solana address. Specify filters like start, end, or limit to narrow search results efficiently.

Instructions

Returns confirmed signatures for transactions involving an address.

Args: account (str): Account address to query before (Optional[str]): Start searching backwards from this signature until (Optional[str]): Search until this signature limit (Optional[int]): Maximum number of signatures to return

Returns: str: Signatures information

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountYes
beforeNo
limitNo
untilNo

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function decorated with @mcp.tool(), which registers and implements the get_signatures_for_address tool. Input schema inferred from type annotations and docstring.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def get_signatures_for_address(
        account: str,
        before: Optional[str] = None,
        until: Optional[str] = None,
        limit: Optional[int] = None,
    ) -> str:
        """Returns confirmed signatures for transactions involving an address.
    
        Args:
            account (str): Account address to query
            before (Optional[str]): Start searching backwards from this signature
            until (Optional[str]): Search until this signature
            limit (Optional[int]): Maximum number of signatures to return
    
        Returns:
            str: Signatures information
        """
        async with AsyncClient(rpc_url) as client:
            sigs = await client.get_signatures_for_address(
                Pubkey.from_string(account),
                before=Signature.from_string(before) if before else None,
                until=Signature.from_string(until) if until else None,
                limit=limit,
            )
            return f"Signatures for address: {sigs}"
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns 'confirmed signatures' and mentions parameters for filtering, but doesn't describe important behaviors like rate limits, authentication requirements, error conditions, pagination, or what 'Signatures information' entails. For a query tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 and appropriately sized. It starts with a clear purpose statement, followed by organized parameter and return sections. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or vague phrasing. It could be slightly more concise by integrating the 'Args' and 'Returns' labels more seamlessly, but overall it's efficient.

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 moderate complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is partially complete. It covers the purpose and parameters adequately but lacks behavioral details (e.g., performance, errors) and doesn't explain the return value beyond 'Signatures information'. For a query tool with siblings, more context on differentiation and output format would improve completeness.

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?

The description includes an 'Args' section that documents all four parameters with brief explanations, adding meaningful context beyond the input schema (which has 0% description coverage). It clarifies that 'account' is the address to query, 'before' and 'until' are for searching signatures, and 'limit' controls the maximum return count. This compensates well for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Returns confirmed signatures for transactions involving an address.' It specifies the verb ('returns'), resource ('confirmed signatures'), and scope ('transactions involving an address'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_signature_statuses' or 'get_transaction', which could have overlapping functionality.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'get_signature_statuses' or 'get_transaction', nor does it specify prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases. The agent must infer usage from the purpose alone.

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

Related 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/tywenk/mcp-sol'

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