Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
XGR MCP Gateway

XGR MCP Gateway

Official
by xgr-network
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get XRC-729 OSTC state

get_xrc729_ostc_state

Retrieve indexed list of OSTC state entries for an XRC-729 contract. Supports pagination and inclusion of deleted entries.

Instructions

Read-only list of indexed OSTC state entries for an XRC-729 contract.

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": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "get_xrc729_ostc_state"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYes
includeDeletedNo
pageNo
limitNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description states 'Read-only', which implies non-destructive behavior. However, with no annotations, the description should disclose more behavioral traits, such as pagination behavior, whether it returns all entries at once or supports filtering, and any rate limits. The term 'indexed' is ambiguous.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is short but not well-structured. It lacks front-loading of key information. While concise in word count, it sacrifices clarity and completeness for brevity.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the complexity of the tool (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain the return format, pagination details, or the meaning of 'indexed'. A minimally viable description should cover these aspects.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The input schema has 4 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any parameter. For example, it does not mention that 'address' is required, or what 'includeDeleted', 'page', and 'limit' do. The description adds no value 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns a 'read-only list of indexed OSTC state entries for an XRC-729 contract', indicating a list operation on a specific resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'read_xrc729_ostc_json', which may 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'read_xrc729_ostc_json'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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