Teardrop

Get Erc20 Balance

get_erc20_balance

Read-only

Get the ERC-20 token balance of a wallet, including symbol and decimals.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chain_id`	No	Chain ID (1=Ethereum, 8453=Base)
`token_address`	Yes	ERC-20 token contract address (0x…)
`wallet_address`	Yes	Wallet address (0x…)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain_id`	Yes
`balance_raw`	Yes
`token_symbol`	Yes
`token_address`	Yes
`token_decimals`	Yes
`wallet_address`	Yes
`balance_formatted`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed5 schema fields changedAug 14, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / chain_id / title
```
Added value: +"Chain Id"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / token_address / title
```
Added value: +"Token Address"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / wallet_address / title
```
Added value: +"Wallet Address"
```
- addedInput schema / title
```
Added value: +"mcp_get_erc20_balanceArguments"
```
First observedJul 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals this as a safe read operation, and the description adds little beyond the return data hint ('including symbol and decimals'), which is also covered by the output schema. No additional behavioral context such as chain support limitations, error conditions, or rate limits is provided.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to stating the tool's purpose, making it appropriately concise.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the simple nature of the tool, the detailed schema, the read-only annotation, and the presence of an output schema, the description is sufficient. It could mention that chain_id defaults to Ethereum, but that is already in the schema, so no major gaps exist.

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

Parameters3/5

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

All three parameters (chain_id, token_address, wallet_address) are fully described in the schema with clear descriptions, so the description adds no new meaning. The schema coverage is 100%, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 function: retrieving an ERC-20 token balance for a given wallet, with the added detail of returning symbol and decimals. While it is specific and distinguishes from generic balance tools, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_eth_balance or get_wallet_portfolio.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies use for querying ERC-20 balances but offers no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The use case is inferred from the tool name and description rather than stated.

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

All Teardrop tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Most tools target distinct data sources, but several near-duplicates exist: get_token_approvals/get_wallet_approvals, get_defi_positions/get_wallet_positions, and get_wallet_portfolio/get_eth_balance. The descriptions do cross-reference and clarify the differences, so an agent can disambiguate with effort, but names alone are not enough.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant get_<noun> pattern is clear and nearly all names use lowercase snake_case with verb-first conventions. A few tools like calculate, record_predictions, http_fetch, and web_search break the get_ pattern, but the overall style remains predictable.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is excessive for a single server, even for a broad DeFi/onchain analytics domain. The count is inflated by generic utilities such as calculate, count_text_stats, web_search, and http_fetch, plus multiple overlapping data-retrieval endpoints, making the surface hard to scan.

Completeness4/5

The set covers an unusually wide range of domain operations: prices, balances, portfolio/positions, approvals, yields, TVL, DEX quotes/volume, transactions, blocks, gas, ENS, contract reads, and risk assessments. It is view-only by design, so missing write/transaction tools is acceptable; minor gaps like address-based token pricing or transaction simulation are workaround-able.

Resources

Need Help?