AINumbers Fintech Intelligence Suite

Agentic Payments Protocol Comparator

compare_agentic_rail_protocols

Read-onlyIdempotent

Agentic Payments Protocol Comparator: OpenChainGraph compute node (routing_policy). Deterministic OpenChainGraph compute node. By default (compute:"auto") inputs are computed server-side on Cloudflare Workers for gpu:false nodes with a registered kernel; compute:"browser" forces client-side execution and returns a browser delegation URL instead. gpu:true nodes always delegate to the browser. Inputs are processed transiently to compute the response and are not stored, logged, or retained. Use synthetic or anonymised inputs only. Exports an AP2 artifact with execution_hash for chain provenance. Output feeds: art-16-google-ap2-mandate-builder, art-23-visa-trusted-agent-protocol-inspector, art-24-mastercard-agentic-token-builder, art-25-a2a-agent-card-validator, art-26-x402-payload-decoder-flow-simulator, ptg-01-ap2-prompt-template-generator. Open at: https://ainumbers.co/chaingraph/art-22-agentic-payments-protocol-comparator.html FV-status (published/proven/still-trusted for this spec): /fv-status/8498d0819c941fdb731f9e10f5d93ee929026919cb111a42149821b48b5ac180.json — a snapshot, not a subscription; this receipt verifies offline regardless of whether that file is ever fetched. Output schema: call describe_tool("compare_agentic_rail_protocols").

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`compute`	No	Compute mode (v0.4 Compute Binding). "auto" (default) = server for gpu:false nodes with registered kernels; "server" = force server-side; "browser" = always return browser delegation URL. gpu:true nodes always delegate.
`parent_hashes`	No	execution_hash values from upstream ChainGraph AP2 artifacts to chain from (sets chain.parent_hashes in the export).
`parent_tool_ids`	No	tool_id values matching parent_hashes, in the same order.
`policy_parameters`	No	Input parameters for this tool's decision function. For gpu:false nodes with a registered kernel, these are computed server-side when compute is "auto" or "server". See the tool's manifest for field names.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 18, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "crosswalk": {
-      "items": {
-        "properties": {
-          "concept": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "values": {
-            "properties": {
-              "acp": {
-                "type": "string"
-              },
-              "ap2": {
-                "type": "string"
-              }
-            },
-            "type": "object"
-          }
-        },
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "note": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "protocol_names": {
-      "items": {
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "protocols_compared": {
-      "items": {
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "protocols_detail": {
-      "items": {
-        "properties": {
-          "artifact": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "audit": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "backer": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "id": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "identity": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "name": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "rail": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "scope": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "signed": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "status": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "sub": {
-            "type": "string"
-          }
-        },
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "recommendation": {
-      "properties": {
-        "also_consider": {
-          "items": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "type": "array"
-        },
-        "also_names": {
-          "items": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "type": "array"
-        },
-        "primary_names": {
-          "items": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "type": "array"
-        },
-        "primary_pick": {
-          "items": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "type": "array"
-        },
-        "rationale": {
-          "type": "string"
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "scenario": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null

Changed1 schema field changedSep 3, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "crosswalk": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "concept": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "values": {
+            "properties": {
+              "acp": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "ap2": {
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "protocol_names": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "protocols_compared": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "protocols_detail": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "artifact": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "audit": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "backer": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "identity": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "rail": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "scope": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "signed": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "status": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "sub": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "recommendation": {
+      "properties": {
+        "also_consider": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "also_names": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "primary_names": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "primary_pick": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "rationale": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "scenario": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedJun 19, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description goes well beyond them: it explains compute:'auto'/'browser' semantics, that gpu:true nodes always delegate, that inputs are processed transiently and never stored or logged, and that an AP2 artifact with execution_hash is exported for chain provenance. This is meaningful behavioral context for a compute node, though the artifact emission is arguably a side effect not reconciled with the readOnly hint.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The prose is a concatenation of infrastructure facts — compute binding, privacy statement, artifact export, sibling IDs, a URL, and an FV-status hash — with the tool's actual function never front-loaded. Substantial content (the long FV-status path and receipt disclaimer) does not help an agent decide or invoke.

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?

Privacy, compute binding, chaining inputs, and provenance output are all covered, and with no output schema the burden of describing returns falls on the description (it partially does via execution_hash and the output-feed list). However, the core functional question — what is being compared and what the comparison yields — is absent, leaving a gap for a tool with nested policy_parameters.

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 coverage is 100% with all four parameters fully documented, including the compute enum and the parent_hashes/parent_tool_ids ordering relationship. The description largely repeats the schema's compute-mode text and adds little new meaning about policy_parameters, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description restates the title ('Agentic Payments Protocol Comparator: OpenChainGraph compute node') and then spends its words on compute-mode plumbing, privacy, and provenance rather than stating what the comparison actually does — which protocols, on which dimensions, producing what result. An agent learns it is 'a deterministic compute node with a decision function' but not what the comparison computes, so it cannot distinguish this from siblings like compare_agentic_payment_protocols or crosswalk_agent_payment_rail_trust.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool routing is given, despite several obvious sibling comparators. The only constraints offered are 'Use synthetic or anonymised inputs only' and the downstream artifact feeds, which describe outputs rather than selection criteria.

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

All AINumbers Fintech Intelligence Suite 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.

Agentic Payments Protocol Comparator

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

Resources