ExchangeRebel — pay-per-call APIs for AI agents (x402 on Solana)

quote_diff_precheck

FREE headline pre-check (100/day per wallet; pass caller). Returns assessability only - whether the two submitted challenges form a valid pair of 402 artefacts for the same endpoint; no diff is computed and no field value is returned.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "caller": "<caller>",
      "first": "<first>",
      "second": "<second>"
    },
    "name": "quote_diff_precheck"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`first`	Yes	One captured 402 challenge in the published submission form: {status?, body (object, JSON string, or null), payment_required_header (base64 string or null)}; at least one carrier present. Processed in memory only, never stored.
`caller`	Yes	Solana base58 wallet of the operator; keys the free allowance (100/day per wallet).
`second`	Yes	One captured 402 challenge in the published submission form: {status?, body (object, JSON string, or null), payment_required_header (base64 string or null)}; at least one carrier present. Processed in memory only, never stored.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses cost ('FREE'), a concrete quota ('100/day per wallet'), the wallet-keyed accounting, and the deliberately narrow return semantics ('assessability only ... no field value is returned'). It does not say what happens when the pair is invalid, whether that is an error or a negative verdict, which is the main remaining behavioral gap.

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?

A single dense sentence with a parenthetical for the quota, front-loading the free/cost fact and then the scope constraint. Every clause carries information, and the most important disambiguation (no diff is computed) sits at the end as a clear stop signal.

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?

For a three-parameter tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers cost, quota, input expectations, and what the response does and does not contain, which is what an agent needs to call it correctly. It stops short of describing the verdict shape or failure behavior, a minor gap given the absence of an output schema.

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%, with each of first/second/caller already documented in detail including the accepted carrier forms and the in-memory-only processing guarantee. The description only echoes the caller/quota link and that two challenges are submitted, adding no syntax or constraint meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3.

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 gives a specific verb+resource ('headline pre-check' of 'two submitted challenges' forming 'a valid pair of 402 artefacts for the same endpoint') and explicitly delimits it against the diffing sibling by stating 'no diff is computed and no field value is returned.' An agent can tell this apart from quote_diff_diff and quote_diff_criteria without opening any schema.

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 establishes context clearly: a free, quota-bounded pre-check that only answers whether the pair is assessable, which implies it precedes the actual diff. However, it never names the alternative tool to call when assessability passes, nor states when-not to use it (e.g., if you already know the pair is valid).

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

All ExchangeRebel — pay-per-call APIs for AI agents (x402 on Solana) tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?