Skip to main content
Glama

find_where_to_buy_crypto

Find Australian cryptocurrency exchanges offering a specified cryptocurrency for purchase using AUD. Use this tool when the user wants to know where an asset can be bought or which Australian exchanges offer it. For comparing the best estimated buy or sell outcome across exchanges, use find_best_australian_exchange instead. Results are estimates and do not place orders. This is a paid data-access tool using XRP on XRPL Mainnet. First call without paymentSignature to receive an x402 v2 payment challenge. An authorised compatible payer must generate PAYMENT-SIGNATURE for the exact resource and retry with identical inputs. Never supply wallet secrets. This server does not sign or initiate payments. If payment fails or times out, verify settlement before retrying.

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": {
      "symbol": "<symbol>"
    },
    "name": "find_where_to_buy_crypto"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
amountNoPurchase amount in Australian dollars (AUD), not the API access price. Defaults to 1000; must be positive.
symbolYesCryptocurrency symbol, for example XRP, TAO or ONDO
paymentSignatureNoOptional base64 x402 v2 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header generated by an authorised payer for the exact resource returned by an unpaid call. Omit to request a challenge. This is a payment payload, never a seed, private key, or password.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / amount / description
      Previous value: -"Purchase amount in Australian dollars"New value: +"Purchase amount in Australian dollars (AUD), not the API access price. Defaults to 1000; must be positive."
    • addedInput schema / properties / paymentSignature
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Optional base64 x402 v2 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header generated by an authorised payer for the exact resource returned by an unpaid call. Omit to request a challenge. This is a payment payload, never a seed, private key, or password.",
      +  "maxLength": 16384,
      +  "minLength": 4,
      +  "pattern": "^[A-Za-z0-9+/]+={0,2}$",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so: it discloses that no orders are placed, that this is a paid XRP/XRPL Mainnet data-access tool, the exact x402 v2 challenge/retry handshake, that no signing occurs server-side, and the wallet-secret prohibition. These are non-obvious operational traits that go well beyond what 'find' implies.

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?

Purpose and the alternative-tool routing are front-loaded in the first two sentences, which is correct ordering. The payment-flow block is long but every clause is load-bearing given there are no annotations; a small amount of tightening (e.g. merging the settlement/retry guidance) would make it tighter.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description does the heavy lifting on the payment protocol and safety constraints, which is the main gap an agent would otherwise fall into. It only lightly characterizes the return payload ('Results are estimates'), leaving output shape unstated, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 the schema already documents symbol, amount (AUD, positive, default 1000) and paymentSignature. The description reinforces the AUD-purchase framing but adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail beyond the schema, so 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 ('Find Australian cryptocurrency exchanges offering a specified cryptocurrency for purchase using AUD') and explicitly names the sibling it is not ('for comparing the best estimated buy or sell outcome across exchanges, use find_best_australian_exchange instead'). An agent can route between the two tools without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit trigger conditions ('when the user wants to know where an asset can be bought or which Australian exchanges offer it') and an explicit exclusion with the named alternative for a different intent. This is the strongest possible usage framing.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources