Skip to main content
Glama
verdixapi

verdix

Official
by verdixapi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Check an address before sending it funds

check_address_risk

Screen any EVM address on Base before sending funds. Get a risk verdict (safe, caution, danger) with score and reasons to decide if it's safe to interact.

Instructions

Screen an EVM address on Base before sending it money or interacting with it. Returns Verdix's verdict JSON unchanged: verdict (safe | caution | danger), risk_score (0-100), reasons, checked, tier, price_usd, as_of. 'danger' means sanctioned, a known scam/exploit/phishing address, an address-poisoning lookalike, a burn address or similar - do not send funds. 'caution' means not enough evidence to call it safe (new, unverified, or a data source was unavailable) - confirm with the user first. PAID: each call costs USDC on Base via x402, paid from the wallet configured in this server (VERDIX_PRIVATE_KEY), never more than VERDIX_MAX_PRICE_USD. Tiers: quick ($0.02), standard ($0.10, default), deep ($0.50); call get_pricing for current prices. A 503 answer (data unavailable) is not charged.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tierNoAnalysis depth and price: quick ($0.02), standard ($0.10), deep ($0.50)standard
addressYesThe EVM address to check (the recipient, contract or counterparty)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true), the description discloses that each call is paid via x402 from a configured wallet, capped by VERDIX_MAX_PRICE_USD, and that 503 responses are not charged. It also names the exact JSON verdict fields returned, which is essential since there is no output schema.

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?

Every sentence in the description earns its place: purpose first, then verdict semantics, billing, tiers, and failure behavior. It is dense but structured with clear markers (PAID, Tiers, 503) and front-loaded with the core screening action.

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?

The tool is safety-critical and paid, and the description covers verdict meanings, cost model, tier selection, where to get current prices, and the no-charge failure case. Since there is no output schema, documenting the exact JSON shape is necessary and done. No critical gap remains for an agent to call it safely and correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description still adds meaning by connecting tier choice to cost in USD, explaining the address as recipient/contract/counterparty in context, and describing the billing cap. The exact price figures are redundant with the schema's tier descriptions, but the cost model context is additive.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Screen an EVM address on Base before sending it money or interacting with it.' It clearly distinguishes itself from get_pricing by naming that sibling as the way to get current prices rather than advertising pricing itself.

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?

It provides explicit action guidance: do not send funds on 'danger', confirm with the user first on 'caution', and treat 503 as a harmless no-charge failure. It also routes price lookups to the sibling get_pricing, establishing a clear division of labor.

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