Skip to main content
Glama

Nansen

by io.github.hurcanNansen

Analyzing wallet performance

wallet_pnl_summary

Get aggregate stats of overall realized PnL for the input address. For Hyperliquid perp traders (chain='hyperliquid'), includes realized PnL from fills plus a current unrealized snapshot of open positions. For chain='all'/'evm' on an EVM address, reports spot/on-chain and Hyperliquid perp results as separate sections (never summed). For a single named chain, this tool covers realized PnL only. Use this tool for analysing the performance of the wallet over a time period.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / request / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "description": "Complete request for wallet PnL summary (flattened).",
-    "properties": {
-      "chain": {
-        "default": "evm",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "dateRange": {
-        "description": "Date range for PnL summary analysis",
-        "properties": {
-          "from": {
-            "description": "Start value: token (see above) or date (YYYY-MM-DD or ___-MM-DD).",
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "to": {
-            "description": "End value: token (see above) or date (YYYY-MM-DD or ___-MM-DD).",
-            "type": "string"
-          }
-        },
-        "required": [
-          "from",
-          "to"
-        ],
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "walletAddress": {
-        "description": "The wallet address to analyze",
-        "type": "string"
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "walletAddress",
-      "dateRange"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "description": "Complete request for wallet PnL summary (flattened).",
+    "properties": {
+      "chain": {
+        "default": "evm",
+        "description": "Blockchain to query. Use 'hyperliquid' for Hyperliquid perp traders only (realized PnL from fills + current unrealized snapshot). 'evm'/'all' on an EVM address reports spot/on-chain and Hyperliquid perp results in separate sections. Or pass a specific chain name for that chain's spot PnL alone.",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "dateRange": {
+        "description": "Date range for PnL summary analysis",
+        "properties": {
+          "from": {
+            "description": "Start value: token (see above) or date (YYYY-MM-DD or ___-MM-DD).",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "to": {
+            "description": "End value: token (see above) or date (YYYY-MM-DD or ___-MM-DD).",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "from",
+          "to"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "walletAddress": {
+        "description": "The wallet address to analyze",
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "walletAddress",
+      "dateRange"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / $defs
      Removed value: -{
-  "DateRange": {
-    "description": "Date range via tokens or dates.\nTokens: NOW, XMIN_AGO, XD_AGO, XH_AGO; THIS_YEAR_START, THIS_QUARTER_START, THIS_MONTH_START, THIS_WEEK_START, TODAY_START; LAST_WEEK_START/END, LAST_MONTH_START/END, LAST_QUARTER_START/END, LAST_YEAR_START/END.\nWeek starts Monday. Quarters are calendar. Dates: YYYY-MM-DD or ___-MM-DD (year omitted).\nPlease check detailed system instructions for more information.",
-    "properties": {
-      "from": {
-        "description": "Start value: token (see above) or date (YYYY-MM-DD or ___-MM-DD).",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "to": {
-        "description": "End value: token (see above) or date (YYYY-MM-DD or ___-MM-DD).",
-        "type": "string"
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "from",
-      "to"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "WalletPnlSummaryRequest": {
-    "description": "Complete request for wallet PnL summary (flattened).",
-    "properties": {
-      "chain": {
-        "default": "evm",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "dateRange": {
-        "$ref": "#/$defs/DateRange",
-        "description": "Date range for PnL summary analysis"
-      },
-      "walletAddress": {
-        "description": "The wallet address to analyze",
-        "type": "string"
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "walletAddress",
-      "dateRange"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  }
-}
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedInput schema / properties / request / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "$ref": "#/$defs/WalletPnlSummaryRequest"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "description": "Complete request for wallet PnL summary (flattened).",
+    "properties": {
+      "chain": {
+        "default": "evm",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "dateRange": {
+        "description": "Date range for PnL summary analysis",
+        "properties": {
+          "from": {
+            "description": "Start value: token (see above) or date (YYYY-MM-DD or ___-MM-DD).",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "to": {
+            "description": "End value: token (see above) or date (YYYY-MM-DD or ___-MM-DD).",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "from",
+          "to"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "walletAddress": {
+        "description": "The wallet address to analyze",
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "walletAddress",
+      "dateRange"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral nuances: Hyperliquid perp includes realized plus unrealized snapshot, EVM/all reports separate sections and never sums, and named chains report realized PnL only. This goes beyond the obvious read-only nature and helps set expectations, though exact output fields are left to the 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is five sentences long, with the main point up front and chain-specific rules logically grouped. Every sentence adds value, though the final sentence is mildly redundant with the first. Still, it is well-organized and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are covered separately. The description addresses the main decision points (which chain to query, what to expect for each), making it complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly. It omits edge cases like invalid addresses or unsupported chains, but these are not critical for successful use.

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?

The description adds significant meaning to the 'chain' parameter by detailing its behavioral implications ('chain='hyperliquid'' vs 'chain='all'/'evm''). However, it does not elaborate on walletAddress or dateRange beyond 'input address' and 'over a time period', leaving those semantics to the schema. With schema coverage indicated at 0%, this is a partial but incomplete compensation.

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 clearly states the tool's primary function: 'Get aggregate stats of overall realized PnL for the input address.' This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like wallet_pnl_for_token, which targets token-specific PnL. The chain-specific behavior is also summarized, further clarifying scope.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives explicit usage context: 'Use this tool for analysing the performance of the wallet over a time period.' It also explains how chain choices affect results, helping the agent decide which chain to pass. It does not name alternative tools explicitly, but the timing and scope guidance are clear.

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

All Nansen toolsInspect
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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly defined purpose, and overlapping tools (e.g., token_flows vs token_recent_flows_summary, nansen_score_top_tokens vs token_discovery_screener) include explicit guidance on when to use them. Even with similar names like prediction_market_trades and prediction_market_address_trades, the descriptions and parameters make the distinction unambiguous.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a domain_prefix_noun pattern (address_, token_, prediction_market_), making them predictable within families. However, outliers like general_search, growth_chain_rank, hyperliquid_leaderboard, and transaction_lookup break the pattern, and some names are long or inconsistently formatted (e.g., smart_traders_and_funds_perp_trades vs smart_traders_and_funds_token_balances).

Tool Count3/5

With 38 tools, the server is far above the typical 3-15 range, making it heavy for agents to navigate. However, Nansen is a broad analytics platform covering wallets, tokens, prediction markets, and smart money activity, so the high count is justifiable as each tool serves a distinct function.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides comprehensive coverage across token analysis (ohlcv, trading, holders, flows, PnL, technicals), wallet analysis (portfolio, transactions, counterparties), prediction markets (lookup, orderbook, trades, PnL), and discovery. The only obvious omission is NFT support, but it is explicitly documented as out of scope, so no critical dead ends exist.

Resources