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

stream_divergence_precheck

FREE pre-check (100/day per wallet; pass caller): input validation and assessability only - whether both artefacts are well-formed and comparable. No comparison, no divergence fact.

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>",
      "streamed_capture": "<streamed_capture>",
      "reference_output": "<reference_output>"
    },
    "name": "stream_divergence_precheck"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`caller`	Yes	Solana base58 wallet of the operator; keys the free allowance (100/day per wallet).
`reference_output`	Yes	One artefact: {chunks: [base64 chunk, ...]} - chunk boundaries preserved as submitted; up to 1,024 chunks and 65,536 decoded bytes.
`streamed_capture`	Yes	One artefact: {chunks: [base64 chunk, ...]} - chunk boundaries preserved as submitted; up to 1,024 chunks and 65,536 decoded bytes.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose two important traits: it is free, and it is rate-limited to 100/day keyed on the caller wallet, plus it does not produce a divergence fact. It stops short of saying what a failed validation looks like or what the response contains, so it is helpful but incomplete.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the most decision-relevant fact ('FREE pre-check'), with the rate limit and the scope exclusion packed into the parenthetical. Dense but no wasted words.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return semantics; it gestures at this ('assessability only - whether both artefacts are well-formed and comparable') but never describes the shape of the verdict. For a validation-gate tool the agent still has to guess what it gets back.

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 chunk/byte limits on the two artefacts, are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the 'pass caller' nudge and the allowance framing, which is marginal value beyond the schema baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('pre-check ... input validation and assessability') and explicitly bounds it ('No comparison, no divergence fact'), which distinguishes it from stream_divergence_compare without naming that sibling. The agent can tell what it does and what it does not do.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied rather than stated: the 'FREE pre-check' framing and the 'no comparison' exclusion suggest it is the cheap step before the compare call, but the description never explicitly says 'use this first, then call stream_divergence_compare' or states when to skip it.

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?