CryptoPulse Data API

muslimtasker_status

[$0.001 USDC per call via x402] Check the status of a MuslimTasker quote request (received, contacted, quoted, booked, completed, closed) and read the quote once MuslimTasker has sent one.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "request_id": "<request_id>",
      "customer_email": "<customer_email>"
    },
    "name": "muslimtasker_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`request_id`	Yes	The request_id returned by quote-request
`customer_email`	Yes	The customer email used in the request (authorizes the lookup)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does add genuinely useful non-schema context: a per-call cost of $0.001 USDC via x402, which an agent needs before invoking. But it does not disclose failure behavior (unknown request_id, mismatched email), whether the call is idempotent, or what the returned quote looks like.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the cost signal front-loaded and the core purpose immediately after. No wasted clauses, though the bracketed pricing prefix slightly obscures an otherwise clean front-load of the verb.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple two-parameter lookup this is mostly adequate, and the status enumeration substitutes for some of what an output schema would provide. However, with no output schema present, the description still leaves the shape and content of a returned quote entirely unexplained.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including that customer_email authorizes the lookup. The description adds nothing about format, case sensitivity, or what happens when the email does not match; the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Check the status of a MuslimTasker quote request') and additionally enumerates the status lifecycle (received, contacted, quoted, booked, completed, closed) plus the ability to read the quote. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling muslimtasker_quote_request, which creates the request this tool inspects.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the parenthetical status list and 'once MuslimTasker has sent one' hint that this is the follow-up call after creating a quote request, and the schema notes request_id comes from quote-request. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement or direct naming of the sibling tool.

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

All CryptoPulse Data API tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?