Skip to main content
Glama

Genexxis paid agent tools (x402)

cryptonews_top

Top crypto stories of the last N hours, deduplicated across 13 outlets and ranked by number of distinct outlets reporting them, then recency: headline, outlets, links, firstSeen, asset/theme tags. Price: $0.005 USDC per call, paid with x402 on Base.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "cryptonews_top"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hoursNoLook-back window in hours, 1-72 (default 24)
limitNoNumber of stories, 1-50 (default 20)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the payment requirement ($0.005 USDC via x402 on Base), the deduplication policy, the ranking order, and the exact response fields. It stops short of noting failure modes, latency, or what happens when fewer than N stories qualify.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the ranking logic and defers return fields and pricing to the end; nothing is wasted. Slightly cramped as one run-on, but every clause carries information.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description compensates by enumerating returned fields (headline, outlets, links, firstSeen, tags), and it surfaces the paid-call model an agent must know before invoking. It lacks only sibling differentiation and edge-case behavior.

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 both params (hours, limit) are already fully documented with ranges and defaults. The description only echoes the look-back notion as 'last N hours' and adds no constraints or format guidance beyond the schema, making baseline 3 appropriate.

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+resource ('Top crypto stories') and adds the ranking mechanics (dedup across 13 outlets, ordered by distinct-outlet count then recency). It is clear what the tool returns, but it never names the closest sibling cryptonews_search, so an agent must infer the split between the two news tools.

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 only implied: 'top stories' suggests trend/overview use versus a targeted search, and the look-back window hints at recency-scoped use. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or routing to cryptonews_search.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources