Skip to main content
Glama

Central Command

by co.supabase.rtcelwjnrbmfmrywacky

List Catalog

cc.list_catalog
Read-onlyIdempotent

List Central Command x402 catalog endpoints (names, prices, parameters, tiers). Purpose: discover which cc.* tools exist and what they cost before calling them. Behavior: READ-ONLY. Does not place orders or charge per-endpoint fees by itself (catalog fetch). Auth: optional X-Api-Key (same catalog is public); payment not required for listing. Cost: free to list. Individual endpoint calls are billed separately when invoked. Rate limit: gateway default. Returns: JSON envelope { ok, endpoint, status, data: { endpoints: [...] } }. Guidelines: Call this first. Then invoke cc. with required params. Admin-only tools are omitted.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesTrue when catalog fetch succeeded.
dataYesFull catalog payload from /x402-gateway/catalog.
errorNo
statusYesHTTP status of catalog fetch.
endpointYesAlways list_catalog.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds that it's READ-ONLY, does not place orders or charge fees, is free to list, and mentions optional auth and rate limit. No contradictions.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Description is well-structured with sections for purpose, behavior, auth, cost, rate limit, return format, and guidelines. No redundant sentences; every sentence adds value.

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?

Given 33 sibling tools and complexity, this description is thorough. Covers purpose, behavior, auth, cost, rate limit, output format, and usage guidance. Output schema exists, so return values are handled, and the description adds a helpful overview.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters and description confirms 'No parameters. Empty object.' Schema coverage is 100%, so description adds no new parameter meaning but accurately reflects the fact.

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 lists catalog endpoints with details like names, prices, parameters, and tiers. It uses specific verb 'list' and resource 'catalog endpoints', and distinguishes from siblings by noting this is for discovering which cc.* tools exist.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this first. Then invoke cc.<slug> with required params.' Also mentions admin-only tools are omitted, providing clear guidance on when and how to use this tool.

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

All Central Command 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools serve overlapping purposes, such as multiple Coinglass data tools (cc.coinglass_data, cc.funding_rates, cc.open_interest, etc.) and multiple AI chat assistants (cc.squirrel_chat, cc.squirrel_chat_v2, cc.openclaw_chat). The distinctions are subtle, likely causing agent misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent `cc.<snake_case>` pattern, with verbs like `list_catalog`, `cc.ma_fetch`, and `cc.trade_builder`. No mixing of conventions.

Tool Count3/5

33 tools is on the high side but reasonable for a comprehensive crypto trading platform. However, significant redundancy (e.g., multiple data sources for similar indicators) suggests some could be consolidated, making the surface feel heavier than necessary.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers most aspects of crypto trading: market data, technical indicators, signals, execution, backtesting, AI analysis, and blockchain RPC. Minor gaps exist (e.g., portfolio management), but the surface is largely complete for the intended domain.

Resources