Skip to main content
Glama

x402-services

by ai.firmbrain

catalysts_governance

On-chain governance activity via Snapshot: active (or recent) proposals ranked by voting power, with title, space, votes, and end time. Send { space?, state?, limit? }. Governance catalysts that can move token prices. [x402 paid tool — price $0.005; POST /api/catalysts/governance]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax proposals, default 10 (max 30)
spaceNoSnapshot space id, e.g. aave.eth; omit for global
stateNo"active" (default), "closed", "pending", or "all"

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses paid nature ($0.005), HTTP method (POST), and endpoint path. It also describes the output structure, covering behavioral aspects beyond annotations.

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?

Description is concise, front-loading the main purpose. Includes extra details (price, endpoint) but these are not excessive and provide useful context for an agent.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with no output schema, the description adequately describes return data (title, space, votes, end time). Covers all key aspects: purpose, parameters, output, and cost.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with full descriptions. The description adds no new information beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it fetches on-chain governance proposals from Snapshot, ranked by voting power, with specific fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like catalysts_calendar and catalysts_unlocks.

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?

Description mentions 'Governance catalysts that can move token prices,' implying usage for price-impact analysis. It does not explicitly specify when not to use or name alternatives, but context is clear.

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

All x402-services 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are organized by domain prefix (e.g., 'crypto_', 'rh_', 'snipe_'), which helps distinguish between areas. Within each domain, they serve distinct purposes, though some overlap between domains exists (e.g., price data appears in multiple groups). Overall, an agent can navigate effectively.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern with a domain prefix and a verb_noun combination (e.g., 'compliance_risk', 'rh_stock', 'snipe_honeypot'). This makes the API predictable and easy to explore.

Tool Count2/5

With 159 tools, the server is extremely large. While the broad scope of web3 and utility functions justifies many tools, the count is significantly above the typical range for a coherent toolkit, potentially overwhelming agents and increasing selection error.

Completeness4/5

The toolkit covers a wide range of web3 operations: crypto, DeFi, compliance, safety, scheduling, memory, etc. There are no obvious major gaps for its intended purpose, though some niche areas might be missing.

Resources