ScorpTech x402 Tools

Central Index

central_index

Read-onlyIdempotent

The index n with central binomial coefficient C(n) equal to value. 1 is index 0, and 2 is index 1. A number that is not a term, or a leading zero, is rejected. value is a decimal integer of at most 600 digits. Price: $0.001 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: POST https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/central-index

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": {
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "central_index"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`value`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description is not needed for safety profile. It does add genuinely non-schema behavior: invalid inputs (non-terms, leading zeros) are rejected, the numeric ceiling is 600 digits, and there is a per-success price of $0.001 USDC via x402 on Solana plus an HTTPS fallback endpoint. The only gap is the absence of the actual error/response shape when a value is rejected.

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 core semantics, then indexing convention, then rejection rules, then pricing/endpoint. The payment and HTTPS sentences are extraneous to selection but are arguably mandatory disclosure for an x402-priced tool; nothing is padded or repetitive.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers input domain, indexing convention, rejection behavior, and payment model. The main missing piece is the success/return shape (an integer index) and whether indices are bounded, though the latter is implied by the 600-digit input cap.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: value is a decimal integer string of at most 600 digits, leading zeros are rejected, and it must be an exact central binomial coefficient. The regex in the schema covers the character set, but the 'must be a term of the sequence' constraint is only in prose.

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 states a precise operation: given a value, return the index n such that the central binomial coefficient C(n) equals it. The indexing convention sentence ('1 is index 0, and 2 is index 1') further disambiguates the output. It does not explicitly name the inverse sibling (central_binomial), so an agent scanning the large sibling list must infer the pairing itself.

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?

Context is implied rather than stated: this is the inverse lookup of the central binomial sequence, and inputs must be exact terms. There is no explicit 'use this instead of X' guidance, no statement about what happens for values that are not terms beyond 'rejected', and no mention of an alternative for approximate/range queries.

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

All ScorpTech x402 Tools 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?