Genexxis paid agent tools (x402)

dealdocs_redflags_pro

Red-flag review of a long deal document (SHA, SPA with schedules, full term sheet pack). Pro tier: up to 100 PDF pages / 5 MB / 400k characters, longer output. Long jobs return a free poll URL. Documents are not stored. Price: $4.99 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": "dealdocs_redflags_pro"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No	https link to the document (PDF, HTML or plain text)
`text`	No	Document text (min 200 characters). Send exactly one of text, url, pdf_base64.
`docType`	No	Optional hint: auto, term_sheet, safe_or_convertible, shareholders_agreement, loi_or_offer, spa_or_apa, nda
`language`	No	Optional output language: auto, en, fr, es, de, it, pt, nl, ar; default auto (language of the document)
`pdf_base64`	No	The PDF file, base64-encoded
`perspective`	No	Optional, red flags only: whose side to review for (neutral, investor, founder, company, buyer, seller, lender, borrower, minority_shareholder, majority_shareholder); default neutral

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

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 async behavior (long jobs return a free poll URL), a privacy property (documents are not stored), and the exact payment model ($4.99 USDC per call, x402 on Base). It stops short of describing the review output or failure modes.

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?

Front-loaded with the operations and document types, then limits, async behavior, privacy, and price, in four tight sentences with no filler. Density is high but every clause is functional.

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 are no annotations and no output schema, so the description is the only place an agent can learn behavior — it covers sizing, payment, async polling, and privacy well, but says nothing about what a red-flag review returns or the critical exactly-one-of url/text/pdf_base64 input constraint.

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 each of the six parameters is already fully documented, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds only the document-type context that mirrors the docType enum and nothing about mutually exclusive input modes or perspective semantics.

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?

Names a specific verb (red-flag review) and resource (long deal documents: SHA, SPA with schedules, term sheet pack) and is immediately distinguishable from dealdocs_redflags by the 'long document' scope and the explicit tier limits. An agent can tell what it gets without opening the schema.

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?

The tier limits (100 PDF pages / 5 MB / 400k characters) implicitly route shorter inputs to the non-pro sibling, but the description never names that alternative or states the condition explicitly. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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

All Genexxis paid agent tools (x402) tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?