Skip to main content
Glama

BarterBanner

by com.barterbanner
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Exchange rules

get_exchange_rules
Read-onlyIdempotent

The rules of the exchange as the network actually computes them: what a view earns, what counts as a view, the commission, the welcome credits, and how to install the widget.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
freeYes
summaryYes
commissionYesshare of each paid view kept by the network
moderationYes
welcome_howYes
register_urlYes
earn_per_viewYes
quality_rangeYeslowest and highest price of one view, in credits
widget_formatsYes
widget_snippetYes
welcome_creditsYeswelcome credits, granted once the site has shown its first blocks to real readers (see welcome_how)
welcome_matchedYesfurther credits, matched to what the site earns on other members' sites
what_counts_as_a_viewYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / welcome_credits / description
      Previous value: -"credits granted when the domain is verified"New value: +"welcome credits, granted once the site has shown its first blocks to real readers (see welcome_how)"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / welcome_how
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / welcome_matched / description
      Previous value: -"further credits, granted as the site earns its own"New value: +"further credits, matched to what the site earns on other members' sites"
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "summary",
-  "earn_per_view",
-  "commission",
-  "quality_range",
-  "welcome_credits",
-  "welcome_matched",
-  "what_counts_as_a_view",
-  "free",
-  "moderation",
-  "widget_snippet",
-  "widget_formats",
-  "register_url"
-]New value: +[
+  "summary",
+  "earn_per_view",
+  "commission",
+  "quality_range",
+  "welcome_credits",
+  "welcome_how",
+  "welcome_matched",
+  "what_counts_as_a_view",
+  "free",
+  "moderation",
+  "widget_snippet",
+  "widget_formats",
+  "register_url"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish this is a safe, idempotent, read-only, non-open-world call, so the burden is low. The description does add one genuinely useful nuance — that these are the rules 'as the network actually computes them', implying live/authoritative values rather than documented policy — but says nothing about freshness, caching, or scope limits.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the core purpose (exchange rules as computed) before the topic list. The colon-separated enumeration is slightly listy but every item earns its place by telling the agent what data is available.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure needn't be described, and with no parameters the input side is trivially complete. The description covers the topical scope well; the only real gap is the absence of any routing guidance relative to the three sibling tools.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. The description reasonably focuses on what content is returned instead.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific resource (the exchange rules) and enumerates the concrete topics covered: view earnings, view definition, commission, welcome credits, and widget installation. This lets an agent distinguish it from check_site and get_network_stats, though it never states the verb 'returns' explicitly and doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to call this versus the sibling tools (check_site, get_network_stats, list_members), nor any precondition or trigger described. Usage is only implied by the subject matter — an agent must infer that it should fetch this when it needs rule semantics.

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

All BarterBanner toolsInspect
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