1ToolRing

Run tool

run_tool

Run a third-party tool, paid from your prepaid 1ToolRing balance. Use the id from discover_tools and an input built from the inspect_tool input_schema. The price is held up front (held), then settled to the real cost (cost, as {usd, idr}); failed or provider-error runs are not charged. Waits up to about 60s for slow tools; if still running it returns a run_id for get_tool_run. Errors: INSUFFICIENT_BALANCE (with balance, needed and topup_url), TOOL_BLOCKED (the tool is not available right now; nothing charged), RUN_TOO_LARGE (with estimated and cap).

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": {
      "tool": "<tool>",
      "input": "<input>"
    },
    "name": "run_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tool`	Yes	Tool id from discover_tools / inspect_tool
`wait`	No	Wait for a slow (async) run to finish, up to ~60s (default true). false returns the run_id at once.
`input`	Yes	Tool input as inspect_tool describes: {"body": {...}, "queryParams": {...}, "pathParams": {...}} (include only the parts the schema declares)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the billing lifecycle (price held up front, then settled to actual cost as {usd, idr}), that failed or provider-error runs incur no charge, and that TOOL_BLOCKED also charges nothing. It also sets the timing contract (~60s wait) and the async escape hatch, none of which the annotations convey.

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?

Front-loaded with action and payment model, then workflow guidance, then error codes in descending priority — every sentence carries information. It is dense with parentheticals (held/cost, {usd, idr}), which slightly burdens readability but adds no wasted filler.

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?

With three parameters, a nested input object, and no output schema, the description still covers what is returned (result, or run_id plus cost), the timing behavior, and the error taxonomy. An agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the outcome correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns extra by explaining the provenance of 'tool' (from discover_tools) and how 'input' must be composed from inspect_tool's schema, which the schema itself only alludes to. It does not restate the wait default, but the schema and the ~60s sentence cover that jointly.

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 opening sentence names a specific verb and resource ('Run a third-party tool') plus a distinguishing business trait (paid from prepaid balance). It is clearly separable from get_tool_run (retrieving an async result) and discover_tools (finding ids) without opening any 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?

Explicit routing is given: use the id from discover_tools, build input from inspect_tool's input_schema, and fall back to get_tool_run when a run_id is returned instead of a result. The failure modes (INSUFFICIENT_BALANCE, TOOL_BLOCKED, RUN_TOO_LARGE) tell the agent which conditions require a different action rather than a retry.

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

All 1ToolRing 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?