Skip to main content
Glama

FiatDock

by com.fiatdock

Base block height ($0.001)

block_number
Read-onlyIdempotent

PAID ($0.001 USDC via x402). The latest Base block number plus its timestamp — a freshness/liveness probe for agents that need to know the chain head. Without payment this returns the 402 challenge; the fiatdock-mcp npm package pays automatically. On any RPC failure the call returns 4xx/5xx and is NOT charged.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paymentNoBase64 of a single x402 v2 PaymentPayload (EIP-3009 transferWithAuthorization on Base USDC). OMIT it on the first call: the 402 you get back carries `howToPay.payloadTemplate` — the exact envelope to fill in — plus the price and the EIP-712 domain. Send it on the second call to complete the purchase; it is forwarded as the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header, never as body data. Nothing is charged for the 402 itself, and a call that fails after payment settles nothing.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
asOfYesISO 8601 read time
networkYesChain read (always base)
timestampYesUnix seconds of the latest block (null if unavailable)
blockNumberYesLatest block height on Base
timestampIsoYesISO 8601 of the latest block time (null if unavailable)

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds substantial behavioral detail: payment requirement, the 402 challenge flow, automatic payment via the npm package, and no charge on RPC failure. This is valuable context beyond the structured annotations.

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?

Three tightly written sentences: cost and purpose up front, then the payment flow and failure behavior. Every sentence contributes new useful information with no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers what is returned, when to use it, how payment works, and what happens on failure. Nothing essential is missing.

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% and the schema's payment parameter description is thorough, explaining the two-call flow. The description reinforces that payment is involved but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: returns the latest Base block number plus timestamp. It also names the intended use as a freshness/liveness probe, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like gas_price or eth_balance.

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 says when to use this tool: 'agents that need to know the chain head'. However, it does not mention alternatives or explicit exclusion cases, so it falls short of a perfect score.

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

All FiatDock toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly separated by resource and action, but a few intentional bundles create mild selection overlap: token_report duplicates the data from token_price + token_safety, and address_intel overlaps eth_balance/usdc_balance plus safety. The descriptions explain the trade-offs well, so this is a minor rather than severe issue.

Naming Consistency4/5

Data-query tools follow a solid subject_metric pattern (token_price, usdc_balance, tx_status), while state-changing tools use verb_object (create_onramp_session, call_service). The pattern is readable and mostly consistent, but not a single uniform verb_noun convention throughout, so it falls just short of perfect.

Tool Count4/5

18 tools is above the typical 3-15 well-scoped range, but the server genuinely spans Base chain primitives, token intelligence, fiat ramps, and a marketplace. Each tool has a purpose, and the count is reasonable rather than bloated.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows are covered end-to-end: quote -> create on/off-ramp session -> order status; token price/safety/metadata/report; marketplace search/get/call; chain/tx primitives. Minor gaps exist, such as no order cancellation, no list-all-services endpoint, and no supported-country/method endpoint despite those details living in descriptions.

Resources