Gate Info Riskcheck

gate-info-riskcheck

Security guardian Skill. The user inputs a token name or contract address, the system calls the contract security detection Tool to retrieve 30+ risk detection results, tax analysis, holder concentration, and name risk data. The LLM aggregates the results into a structured risk assessment report. Address compliance checking will be added in a future phase.

Trigger Scenarios: User mentions a token/contract address + keywords like safe, risk, check, audit, honeypot, rug, contract security, scam.

Routing Rules

Execution Workflow

Mode A: Token Security Check (Core Mode — Ready)

Step 1: Intent Recognition & Parameter Extraction

Extract from user input:

• token: Token symbol (e.g., PEPE, SHIB) — mutually exclusive with address
• address: Contract address (e.g., 0x...) — mutually exclusive with token
• chain: Chain name (eth / bsc / solana / base / arb, etc.) — required

Parameter Completion Strategy:

• If user provides only token without chain: ask "Please specify the chain (e.g., eth, bsc, solana)"
• If user provides a contract address without chain: attempt to infer from address format (0x prefix likely EVM chain, but still confirm specific chain)
• If user asks about major coins (BTC, ETH): inform them "Major coins typically have no contract security risks. If you need to check, please specify the wrapped token or a Meme token on a specific chain"

Step 2: Call 2 MCP Tools in Parallel

Both Tools are called in parallel with no dependencies.

Step 3: LLM Aggregation — Generate Risk Report

Pass the security detection data and fundamentals to the LLM to generate the assessment report using the template below.

Mode B: Address Risk Check (Degraded Mode)

info_compliance_check_address_risk is not yet available (P3 phase). Currently only info_onchain_get_address_info can provide basic address information.

Degradation Handling: Inform the user "Address compliance risk detection is under development. Currently only basic address information is available. For token contract security checks, please provide the token name or contract address."

Report Template (Token Security Mode)

## {token} Contract Security Report

### 1. Risk Overview

| Metric | Result |
|--------|--------|
| Chain | {chain} |
| Contract Address | {address} |
| Overall Risk Level | {risk_level_text} ({highest_risk_level}) |
| High-Risk Items | {high_risk_num} |
| Medium-Risk Items | {middle_risk_num} |
| Low-Risk Items | {low_risk_num} |
| Honeypot Detected | {is_honeypot ? "⛔ Yes" : "✅ No"} |
| Open Source | {is_open_source ? "✅ Yes" : "⚠️ No"} |

### 2. High-Risk Item Details

{If high-risk items exist, list each:}

| Risk Item | Description | Value |
|-----------|------------|-------|
| {risk_name_1} | {risk_desc_1} | {risk_value_1} |
| {risk_name_2} | {risk_desc_2} | {risk_value_2} |
| ... | ... | ... |

{If no high-risk items: "✅ No high-risk items detected"}

### 3. Tax Analysis

| Metric | Value | Status |
|--------|-------|--------|
| Buy Tax | {buy_tax}% | {Normal/Elevated/Extreme} |
| Sell Tax | {sell_tax}% | {Normal/Elevated/Extreme} |
| Transfer Tax | {transfer_tax}% | {Normal/Elevated/Extreme} |

{If multiple DEX pools have different tax rates, list the major pool breakdowns}

### 4. Holder Concentration

| Metric | Value | Status |
|--------|-------|--------|
| Holder Count | {holder_count} | {Many/Normal/Low} |
| Top 10 Holder % | {top10_percent}% | {Normal/High/Extremely Concentrated} |
| Top 100 Holder % | {top100_percent}% | — |
| Developer Holdings | {dev_holding_percent}% | {Normal/High} |
| Insider Holdings | {insider_percent}% | {Normal/High} |
| Largest Single Holder | {max_holder_percent}% | {Normal/High} |

### 5. Name Risk

| Metric | Result |
|--------|--------|
| Domain Token | {is_domain_token ? "⚠️ Yes" : "✅ No"} |
| Contains Sensitive Words | {is_sensitive ? "⚠️ Yes" : "✅ No"} |
| Sensitive Words | {sensitive_words} |

### 6. Project Basic Info (Supplementary)

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Project Name | {project_name} |
| Sector | {category} |
| Listed on Major Exchanges | {exchange_list} |

### 7. Overall Assessment

{LLM generates a 3-5 sentence comprehensive risk assessment:}
- Overall contract safety level
- Most critical risk items (if any)
- Whether holder concentration is healthy
- Whether tax rates are reasonable
- Whether further manual audit is recommended

### ⚠️ Risk Warnings

{Auto-generated explicit warnings based on detection results:}
- Honeypot detection (if applicable)
- High tax warning (if applicable)
- Excessive holder concentration (if applicable)
- Contract not open-source (if applicable)

> The above analysis is based on automated on-chain data detection and cannot cover all risk scenarios. Please combine with project due diligence and community research for comprehensive judgment.

Decision Logic

Risk Level Mapping

Error Handling

Cross-Skill Routing

Available Tools & Degradation Notes

Safety Rules

1. Mandatory honeypot warning: When is_honeypot=true is detected, display the "⛔ Critical Risk" warning in the most prominent position — never downplay
2. No investment advice: Risk assessment is based on on-chain data and must include a "not investment advice" disclaimer
3. No absolute safety guarantees: Even if all checks pass, state that "automated detection cannot cover all risks"
4. Data transparency: Label detection data source and timestamp
5. Flag missing data: When any dimension has no data, explicitly inform the user — never fabricate safety conclusions
6. Address privacy: Do not proactively expose address holder identities — only display publicly available on-chain data