seoul-apt-signal

by com.airblockfz

Check your subscription status & terms (FREE), or activate the monthly plan: call with activate:true to receive the $50 x402 payment challenge, sign it, and retry — that buys 30 days of unlimited calls and returns your X-SUB-KEY token (pass it as a header to skip per-call payment). Until you subscribe, signal calls are $0.01 each (6-day trial from your first paid call). Optionally pass your ERC-8004 agentId to link it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agentId`	No	Optional ERC-8004 agent id to link to this subscription.
`activate`	No	true = request the $50 subscription payment challenge (402) to sign & retry.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: the 402 payment challenge, token return, per-call cost, trial period, and optional agent linking. Could be more structured but covers important aspects.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single run-on paragraph with three sentences conveying multiple pieces of information. Could be better structured for readability.

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?

Given the complexity of subscription activation and payment flow, the description adequately explains the process, token return, and pricing. Lacks explicit return value info but that's implied.

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 has 100% parameter coverage; description adds context: 'activate' triggers payment challenge, 'agentId' links to subscription. Adds value beyond schema descriptions.

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 specifies the tool's two modes: checking subscription status (FREE) and activating the monthly plan with activate:true. It distinguishes from sibling tools (evaluate_symbol, etc.) which are unrelated to subscriptions.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides explicit guidance on when to use each mode (check vs activate), including the payment challenge flow and token usage. While it doesn't state when not to use siblings, siblings are sufficiently different to not require exclusion.

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

All seoul-apt-signal 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

A4.3/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a distinct purpose: pitch for onboarding, rate for feedback, evaluate_symbol for single-district paid analysis, and scan_bottoms/scan_tops for paid multi-district scans. No overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tools use a mix of single-word (pitch, rate) and verb_noun (evaluate_symbol, scan_bottoms, scan_tops) conventions. While mostly clear, the inconsistency in pattern is minor.

Tool Count5/5

With only 5 tools, the set is lean and well-scoped for the niche domain of Seoul apartment signals. Each tool has a clear purpose and no tool seems superfluous or missing.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers key workflows: onboarding (pitch), single-district analysis (evaluate_symbol), multi-district scans (scan_bottoms/scan_tops), and feedback (rate). A minor gap is the lack of a tool to list all districts or historical data, but the core functionality is solid.

Resources

Need Help?