alalanet — check before you pay

Find working agent services

find_service

Read-only

Use when you need a paid API or MCP server for a task, or a working alternative after a call failed. Pass query in plain words (e.g. weather forecast, web search, image generation); optional protocol (x402 or mcp), only_alive (default true) and limit (1-25, default 10). Read-only; free tier 300 searches a day. Returns services ranked by the open Trust Score (/trust): each with status, advice, trust_score, live price and network, pay_to, uptime and an id. Next: check_service with the id or url before the first payment, then preflight_payment right before signing.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	maximum number of results, 1 to 25 (default 10)
`query`	Yes	what you need, in plain words (e.g. weather forecast, web search, image generation)
`protocol`	No	filter by protocol: x402 (pay per call) or mcp (remote MCP server); empty means both
`only_alive`	No	return only services that work as listed right now (default true)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	Yes
`results`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 6, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / alalanet_test_purchase

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "at": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "bytes": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "http_status": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "outcome": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "response_sha256": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "tx": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "at",
+    "outcome",
+    "http_status",
+    "bytes",
+    "tx",
+    "note"
+  ],
+  "type": [
+    "null",
+    "object"
+  ]
+}

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint=false), it discloses a concrete rate limit (free tier 300 searches a day) and the ranking basis (open Trust Score with a /trust link). It also describes the shape of each result — status, advice, trust_score, live price and network, pay_to, uptime, id — which tells the agent what it can act on.

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?

It is front-loaded with the usage trigger, then parameters, then return shape, then next steps — a logical order with no filler sentences. It loses a point only for restating schema defaults and ranges that the agent already has in structured form.

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 discovery tool with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description supplies the remaining decision-relevant context: when to reach for it, the rate limit, the ranking signal, and the exact follow-up chain before payment. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented with types, defaults, and ranges. The description restates the same facts (plain-words query with examples, protocol x402/mcp, only_alive default true, limit 1-25 default 10) without adding new semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a concrete discovery purpose — finding a paid API or MCP server for a task — and implicitly defines the resource via the returned service records. It clearly separates itself from siblings by naming check_service and preflight_payment as the follow-up steps rather than alternatives.

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 trigger conditions are given: when you need a paid API/MCP server, or when you need a working alternative after a call failed. It also sequences the tool against siblings, telling the agent to call check_service with the returned id or url before the first payment and preflight_payment before signing.

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

All alalanet — check before you pay tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?