Skip to main content
Glama

x402-services

by ai.firmbrain

rh_dislocation

Tokenized-stock rich/cheap signal on Robinhood Chain: compares the onchain DEX token price vs the real equity's last close vs the Lighter perp mark, with each pairwise spread % and a directional NAV-convergence verdict. Send { ticker, threshold? }. The tokenized-stock basis trade in one call — is the onchain token trading rich or cheap vs the real stock right now. [x402 paid tool — price $0.05; POST /api/rh/dislocation]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tickerYesRobinhood tokenized-stock ticker, e.g. NVDA, TSLA, AAPL
thresholdNo% band treated as fair (default 0.5)

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 discloses important behavioral traits: it is a paid tool ($0.05) and specifies the endpoint (POST /api/rh/dislocation). It describes the output (pairwise spreads and verdict) but does not detail error handling or auth requirements.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and includes necessary details like pricing. The second sentence is somewhat redundant with the schema but remains concise overall.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (pairwise spreads and verdict). It covers the main aspects but could be more specific about the output format.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds meaning by explaining the purpose (comparing three prices) and indicating that threshold is optional with a default. This goes beyond the schema.

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 purpose: it compares onchain DEX token price to real equity close and perp mark, providing spreads and a verdict. It uses specific verbs and distinguishes from sibling tools like rh_arb and rh_basis by focusing on tokenized-stock dislocation.

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 usage (e.g., 'is the onchain token trading rich or cheap vs the real stock right now?') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or provide exclusions. The context is clear but lacks explicit guidance.

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