Skip to main content
Glama

ScorpTech x402 Tools

Quat Pow

quat_pow
Read-onlyIdempotent

Integer power of a quaternion. i squared is -1, and i to the fourth is 1. Exponent 0 is 1, including zero to the 0. A negative power inverts first. Price: $0.001 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: POST https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/quat-pow

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": {
      "q": "<q>",
      "exp": "<exp>"
    },
    "name": "quat_pow"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYes
expYes

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?

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: exponent edge cases, inversion for negative powers, per-call pricing, and an alternate HTTPS endpoint.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded, and the extra sentences cover exponent edge cases, pricing, and endpoint information. It is reasonably efficient, though the brief i-squared/i-fourth examples are somewhat pedagogical rather than essential.

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?

For a simple two-parameter math tool, the description covers the operation and exponent edge cases well. However, with no output schema and no schema parameter descriptions, it leaves the quaternion input format and return value shape unstated.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains exponent edge cases but says nothing about the 'q' parameter's expected four-element string-array format or component ordering.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Integer power of a quaternion.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling quaternion tools such as quat_mul, quat_inv, quat_norm, and quat_rotate.

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?

It clarifies exponent behavior for 0 and negative exponents, which helps an agent use the tool correctly. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this over related tools like quat_mul or sl2_pow; usage is implied by the operation name.

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