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

settlement_precheck

FREE headline settlement pre-check (100/day per wallet; pass caller). Returns assessability only - whether the signature and expected fields are well-formed; no chain read is performed and no verdict is returned. The full signed report is the paid settlement_verify call.

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>",
      "signature": "<signature>"
    },
    "name": "settlement_precheck"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`caller`	Yes	Solana base58 wallet of the operator; keys the free allowance (100/day per wallet).
`expected`	No	The expected settlement fields: payTo (wallet), amountUnits (USDC micro-units), and optionally tokenAccount and memo.
`signature`	Yes	The one Solana transaction signature to verify. Read live from the chain at call time; never stored.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose cost (free), quota (100/day per wallet), and the absence of a verdict. However, it says "no chain read is performed" while the input schema states the signature is "Read live from the chain at call time," leaving the agent with a genuine conflict about what the tool actually does at runtime.

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?

Three dense sentences ordered from cost, to scope, to alternative; nothing is padding. "Pass caller" is slightly awkward phrasing but costs little.

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?

Covers pricing, quota, output nature (assessability flag, not a verdict), and the escalation path, which is what an agent needs for a pre-check tool with no output schema. The unresolved contradiction with the schema's "read live from the chain" claim is the one missing piece.

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%, so all three parameters including the nested expected object are already documented. The description only echoes "pass caller" and ties the allowance to the wallet, adding essentially nothing beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("FREE headline settlement pre-check") and immediately scopes it: assessability/well-formedness only, no verdict. It explicitly separates itself from the sibling settlement_verify, which is the paid full report.

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?

Names the alternative (settlement_verify) and the condition selecting it — the full signed report is the paid call. The statement that no chain read or verdict occurs tells the agent this is not the tool for a real settlement determination.

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?