Somnia MCP Server

by vastavikadi

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

getContractsWithHoldings

Read-only

Fetch contracts holding a specified token at or above a defined threshold.

Instructions

Gets a list of contracts containing specific token with defined threshold.

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": {
      "chainName": "<chainName>",
      "token_address": "<token_address>",
      "authToken": "<authToken>"
    },
    "name": "getContractsWithHoldings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`authToken`	Yes	Authorization token for accessing the Somnia API
`chainName`	Yes
`token_address`	Yes	Token address to fetch contracts for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 8, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the read-only nature. However, the description introduces 'defined threshold' without explaining what it is or how it is determined, and it does not disclose pagination or return structure. This is a gap beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Single sentence with no filler, front-loaded with action and resource. However, the ambiguity around 'threshold' reduces its effectiveness in conveying the full picture.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only list tool with no output schema, the description should clarify the threshold, return value, and list limits. It only says 'list of contracts,' leaving the threshold concept undefined and failing to explain expected response content. Incomplete for a 3-parameter tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers 67% of parameters with descriptions (authToken and token_address). The description references 'specific token' mapping to token_address and mentions a threshold but provides no parameter to define it, nor does it explain chainName's const value. It adds little meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description uses a specific verb 'Gets' and identifies resource 'contracts' filtered by token and threshold. It distinguishes from siblings like getTokenHolders by focusing on contracts, but the phrase 'defined threshold' is ambiguous because no threshold parameter appears in the schema.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as getTokenHolders or getTokenBalance may be similar, but the description does not mention them or any exclusion criteria.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.