**Goal:** answer "is my validator (or one I'm considering delegating to) doing what it should" —
current stake and trust, whether it's trending up or down, and who's actually behind the numbers.

## The sequence [#the-sequence]

```
1. get_validator_detail { hotkey }                — current stake, trust, APY, nominator count
2. get_validator_history { hotkey, window: "30d" } — daily stake/emission series
3. get_validator_nominators { hotkey, limit }      — who's staking to it, ranked by net flow
```

All three take the same `hotkey` and can run in parallel — none depends on another's output.

## What each output means [#what-each-output-means]

* **`get_validator_detail`** — `avg_validator_trust` close to `1.0` means the network consistently
  validates this hotkey's weights; `apy_estimate` is the current realized return; `nominator_count`
  is a rough popularity signal on its own, more useful alongside step 3's actual flow.
* **`get_validator_history`** — read `total_stake_tao` across the `points` array for the trend, not
  just the latest value. A validator can look fine on `get_validator_detail` alone while quietly
  bleeding stake day over day.
* **`get_validator_nominators`** — `net_staked_tao` per nominator (staked minus unstaked) is the
  honest signal; `gross_staked_tao` alone can look active on a nominator who's actually cycling
  stake in and out without net conviction.

## Failure branch [#failure-branch]

A hotkey with `nominator_count: 0` and an all-zero `subnets` array isn't necessarily wrong input —
`get_validator_detail`'s own contract returns a zeroed aggregate for a cold or never-registered
hotkey rather than an error, so double-check the ss58 itself (a coldkey passed where a hotkey was
expected is the most common mistake) before assuming the tool is broken.

## Executed transcript (a subnet-1 validator, 2026-07-28) [#executed-transcript-a-subnet-1-validator-2026-07-28]

<Callout title="Real output, condensed" type="info">
  Run live against the production API for this doc. Full JSON trimmed to the fields the steps above
  actually use; the hotkey is a real, publicly-registered validator.
</Callout>

```json
// 1. get_validator_detail { hotkey: "5HbNZ77c...fqGe" }
{ "coldkey_identity": { "name": "Macrocosmos" }, "nominator_count": 45,
  "total_stake_tao": 1534314.77, "avg_validator_trust": 0.999985,
  "apy_estimate": 0.454058959, "subnets": [{ "netuid": 1, "validator_permit": true }] }

// 2. get_validator_history { hotkey: "5HbNZ77c...fqGe", window: "30d" }
// 19 daily points; the two ends of the series:
{ "snapshot_date": "2026-07-10", "total_stake_tao": 1526929.28 }
{ "snapshot_date": "2026-07-28", "total_stake_tao": 1534314.77 }

// 3. get_validator_nominators { hotkey: "5HbNZ77c...fqGe", limit: 5 }
{ "nominators": [
  { "coldkey": "5HCFWv...DHh", "net_staked_tao": 131.17, "event_count": 4 },
  { "coldkey": "5D2tFA...FcL", "net_staked_tao": 0.29,  "event_count": 1 },
  { "coldkey": "5CUYgS...ECR", "net_staked_tao": 0.03,  "event_count": 26 }
] }
```

**Reading this one:** stake grew \~0.5% over the window (1,526,929 → 1,534,315 TAO) with validator
trust essentially at the ceiling — a stable, well-run validator. The nominator list is the more
interesting read: the top-net-flow nominator staked once and stayed, while a smaller one made 26
events for a net position of 0.03 TAO — someone actively cycling stake in and out rather than
holding a conviction position. Neither is wrong, but they're different signals `get_validator_detail`
alone wouldn't have shown.

## Tools used [#tools-used]

[`get_validator_detail`](/docs/api-reference/validators/validator-detail), [`get_validator_history`](/docs/api-reference/validators/validator-history), [`get_validator_nominators`](/docs/api-reference/validators/validator-nominators) — same tools, callable directly over MCP (`prompts/get name="monitor_my_validator"`) or as the REST routes each links to.