Skip to main content
Glama
veniceai

Venice MCP Server

Official
by veniceai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Venice Crypto RPC Proxy

venice_crypto_rpc
Destructive

Proxy JSON-RPC requests to supported blockchain networks, handling single calls or batches up to 100 and idempotency keys for write relays.

Instructions

Proxy one JSON-RPC request or a batch of up to 100 requests to a supported blockchain network. Use venice_crypto_networks for the live network list. For a simple call, pass rpc_method/rpc_params; for complete request IDs or batches, pass request. Relays (eth_sendRawTransaction, eth_sendUserOperation, Solana sendTransaction, and Starknet writes) must be sent as single requests (not batched) with idempotency_key; reuse the same key when retrying. Results are returned as compact JSON; responses larger than 64 KiB are rejected after Venice has billed them, so keep queries narrow. Supports x402 wallet auth (no Venice account needed) and API key.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
networkYesNetwork slug returned by venice_crypto_networks, e.g. "ethereum-mainnet".
requestNoA single JSON-RPC request object (ID optional) or a non-empty batch of at most 100 request objects (ID required per item).
rpc_methodNoConvenience form for a single request. Do not combine with request.
rpc_paramsNoParameters for rpc_method, by position (array) or by name (object).
idempotency_keyNoReuse the same key when retrying a request. Required for eth_sendRawTransaction, eth_sendUserOperation, Solana sendTransaction, and Starknet writes so a lost response is not broadcast again.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed11 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Reuse the same key when retrying a request. Required for eth_sendRawTransaction, eth_sendUserOperation, Solana sendTransaction, and Starknet writes so a lost response is not broadcast again.",
+  "pattern": "^[A-Za-z0-9_-]{1,255}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / network / description
      Previous value: -"Full network id, e.g. \"base-mainnet\" (NOT just \"base\"), \"ethereum-mainnet\", \"polygon-mainnet\"."New value: +"Network slug returned by venice_crypto_networks, e.g. \"ethereum-mainnet\"."
    • removedInput schema / properties / network / minLength
      Removed value: -1
    • addedInput schema / properties / network / pattern
      Added value: +"^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9-]{0,99}$"
    • addedInput schema / properties / request
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "id": {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "integer"
+            }
+          ],
+          "description": "Caller-supplied request ID. Defaults to 1 for a single request."
+        },
+        "jsonrpc": {
+          "const": "2.0",
+          "description": "JSON-RPC version. Defaults to \"2.0\".",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "method": {
+          "description": "JSON-RPC method name.",
+          "minLength": 1,
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "params": {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "items": {},
+              "type": "array"
+            },
+            {
+              "additionalProperties": {},
+              "type": "object"
+            }
+          ],
+          "description": "Method parameters, by position (array) or by name (object)."
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "method"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "id": {
+            "anyOf": [
+              {
+                "$ref": "#/properties/request/anyOf/0/properties/id/anyOf/0"
+              },
+              {
+                "$ref": "#/properties/request/anyOf/0/properties/id/anyOf/1"
+              }
+            ],
+            "description": "Required request ID used to correlate this batch item with its response."
+          },
+          "jsonrpc": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/request/anyOf/0/properties/jsonrpc"
+          },
+          "method": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/request/anyOf/0/properties/method"
+          },
+          "params": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/request/anyOf/0/properties/params"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "method",
+          "id"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "maxItems": 100,
+      "minItems": 1,
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "A single JSON-RPC request object (ID optional) or a non-empty batch of at most 100 request objects (ID required per item)."
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / rpc_method / description
      Added value: +"Convenience form for a single request. Do not combine with request."
    • addedInput schema / properties / rpc_params / $ref
      Added value: +"#/properties/request/anyOf/0/properties/params"
    • addedInput schema / properties / rpc_params / description
      Added value: +"Parameters for rpc_method, by position (array) or by name (object)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / rpc_params / items
      Removed value: -{}
    • removedInput schema / properties / rpc_params / type
      Removed value: -"array"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "network",
-  "rpc_method"
-]New value: +[
+  "network"
+]
  2. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well past the annotations (destructive/openWorld/not-idempotent) by disclosing the 64 KiB rejection threshold and that Venice bills rejected oversized responses, the two auth modes (x402 wallet, no account needed, or API key), the 100-item batch cap, and the single-request rule for transaction relays. These are exactly the failure modes an agent would otherwise hit blind.

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?

Five sentences, each carrying distinct information (routing, call forms, relay rule, size/billing limit, auth), with the core purpose front-loaded. No filler or restated schema text.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description covers the response shape ('compact JSON') and the size ceiling, plus auth, batching, and idempotency requirements. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this proxy safely and correctly is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents every parameter, but the description adds the relational semantics the schema can't convey: the two mutually exclusive call forms, the network slug coming from venice_crypto_networks, and the retry contract for idempotency_key. That is meaningful added meaning above the baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Proxy one JSON-RPC request or a batch of up to 100 requests to a supported blockchain network') and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling venice_crypto_networks. An agent can immediately tell this is the execution tool versus the network-listing tool.

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?

Gives explicit routing: use venice_crypto_networks for the live network list; use rpc_method/rpc_params for a simple call versus request for custom IDs or batches; relays must be single (not batched) with an idempotency_key, reused on retry. Conditions and alternatives are stated, not inferred.

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