Skip to main content
Glama

Genexxis paid agent tools (x402)

safepay_pass

24-hour SafePay pass: up to 5000 preflight checks on GET /p/preflight with Authorization: Bearer . Cheaper than per-call above ~170 checks a day. Price: $0.50 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": "safepay_pass"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and discloses important traits: 24-hour validity, a 5000-check quota, the authorized endpoint and header format, and the $0.50 USDC x402 payment rail on Base. It still leaves unclear what the invocation returns, such as whether it issues the bearer token, and what happens after the quota is exhausted.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded, leading with the 24-hour pass and quota before adding pricing and payment details. Every clause contributes useful selection or usage context.

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?

For a zero-parameter purchase/access pass with no output schema and no annotations, it covers the essential offer, quota, endpoint, auth format, and price. The remaining gap is the lack of clarity around return value and token delivery.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there are no input semantics to explain beyond the fixed offer terms. The description appropriately focuses on what the pass provides rather than inventing parameter details.

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?

The description identifies a specific artifact, a 24-hour SafePay pass, and scopes it to up to 5000 preflight checks on GET /p/preflight. It also distinguishes the offer from per-call pricing via the break-even point, though it does not explicitly say whether invoking the tool purchases, activates, or retrieves the pass.

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 provides a clear usage condition: this pass is cheaper than per-call above roughly 170 checks per day, which tells an agent when this is preferable to safepay_preflight. It does not compare against the weekly sibling or state exclusions, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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