Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

Pre-signature x402 payment verdict (GO/HOLD/STOP) for AI agents, with a verifiable signed receipt.

Status
Healthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL

Glama MCP Gateway

Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.

MCP client
Glama
MCP server

Full call logging

Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.

Tool access control

Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.

Managed credentials

Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.

Usage analytics

See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.

100% free. Your data is private.
Tool DescriptionsA

Average 4.1/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

Only one tool exists, so no risk of ambiguity. The tool's purpose is clearly defined.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool name 'forecast_payment' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, which is consistent and intuitive.

Tool Count3/5

A single tool for a guardrail service feels borderline; while the tool is well-scoped to its specific function, the server could benefit from additional tools (e.g., to retrieve past verdicts or manage settings).

Completeness4/5

The tool covers the core payment forecasting functionality (sanctions, reputation, anomaly checks) and returns a signed receipt, but lacks any history or configuration capabilities, which would be minor gaps.

Available Tools

1 tool
forecast_paymentAInspect

Pre-signature x402 payment verdict: GO / HOLD / STOP for paying a counterparty, from settlement reputation, price-anomaly (quoted vs the payee's own median), and OFAC sanctions — with a third-party-verifiable Ed25519 signed receipt. Verdict only; never takes custody. Free under $10 at risk; over that, returns an x402 payment challenge.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assetYese.g. USDC
chainYese.g. base
payerNoagent's EVM wallet (optional; binds settlement)
amountYesamount as a decimal string, e.g. "0.09"
contextNo{quoted_price_history, expected_recipient}
agent_idNocaller DID/identity
resourceNowhat's being paid for
counterpartyYesrecipient wallet from the 402
Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: verdict-only non-custodial action, Ed25519 signed receipt, and cost conditions. It lacks details on failure modes or authorization.

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 concise sentences that front-load the purpose and critical details without any waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has 8 parameters and nested objects but no output schema; the description does not explain the structure of the return value or the meaning of GO/HOLD/STOP, leaving gaps.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions, so the description adds minimal extra semantics beyond examples like 'e.g. USDC'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the tool provides a pre-signature x402 payment verdict (GO/HOLD/STOP) based on specific factors, distinct from a payment execution tool.

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?

It specifies that the tool never takes custody and explains the free vs. challenge threshold, but does not explicitly mention when to avoid using this tool or provide alternatives.

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

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources