FDA Recall Alerts — Food & Product Safety (fdarecall)

check_earnings

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check how much I have earned and what is pending. Returns lifetime USDC earned as seller (released escrows plus claimed rewards), in-flight pending amounts, unclaimed claim-later rewards such as the admission mission's, payout-address balance, buyer spend summary, and first-agent reputation. Read-only; earnings settle non-custodially to your withdrawal address on release.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	Yes
`reputation`	No
`pending_usdc`	No
`spend_summary`	No
`payout_address`	No
`unclaimed_usdc`	No
`how_to_get_paid`	Yes
`escrow_sales_usdc`	No
`wallet_balance_usdc`	No
`lifetime_earned_usdc`	No
`missions_earned_usdc`	No
`deferred_claimed_usdc`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by explaining the non-custodial settlement behavior ('earnings settle non-custodially to your withdrawal address on release') and clarifying what 'earned' means in terms of released escrows plus claimed rewards. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. The purpose is front-loaded, the return payload is listed compactly, and the settlement caveat is a meaningful one-liner. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only query tool with strong annotations, the description fully covers what the agent needs: what the tool returns, the read-only nature, and the relevant settlement behavior. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the explicit enumeration of return categories.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema documentation coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter burden for the description to carry. The description correctly implies the owner is derived from the authenticated context without needing to elaborate.

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 names a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('earnings'), then enumerates exactly what is included: lifetime USDC, pending amounts, unclaimed rewards, payout-address balance, buyer spend, and reputation. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like get_agent_contract or find_paid_work without needing to reference them.

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?

The intended use is clear from the phrasing 'Check how much I have earned and what is pending,' but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives, no stated exclusions, and no mention of related tools. Usage is implied rather than explicitly framed.

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

All FDA Recall Alerts — Food & Product Safety (fdarecall) tools Inspect

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

B3.3/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

The tool set blends FDA recall query tools with generic A2AWire marketplace tools, making purpose boundaries unclear. Multiple tools overlap: data_session_fund, data_session_funding_package, and data_session_open all describe payment/session setup, while a2awire_guide and get_recommended_action both serve as navigational helpers.

Naming Consistency2/5

Some tools follow a verb_noun pattern (data_session_open, data_session_query, discover_agents), but others are inconsistent or vague (a2awire_guide, check_earnings, register, verify_contract). The mix of domain-specific and platform tool naming with no coherent convention makes the surface feel disjointed.

Tool Count2/5

16 tools is not inherently excessive, but most are unrelated to FDA recall alerts; they cover agent registration, onboarding, escrow, hiring, and earnings. Only a handful actually concern the stated FDA recall data domain, so the count is poorly scoped for the server's apparent purpose.

Completeness2/5

For an FDA recall alert server, the surface is severely incomplete: there is no direct recall listing, search, filtering, or detail tool, only a generic data_session_query with preview. The remaining tools are platform infrastructure, leaving the actual recall domain shallow and dependent on an opaque paid query flow.

Resources

Need Help?