ScorpTech x402 Tools

Secret Scan

secret_scan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Scan code, config, logs, diffs or prompts for leaked credentials before you commit, share or send them to an LLM: 50+ rules (AWS, GitHub, GitLab, Slack, Stripe, Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI, Hugging Face, npm, PyPI, Twilio, Telegram, Discord, DigitalOcean, Vault, database URLs, JWTs, PEM private keys) plus crypto-wallet secrets (EVM/Solana hex and base58 keys, Solana keypair arrays, checksum-validated Bitcoin WIF, seed phrases) and entropy-checked generic password assignments. Findings carry line/column, severity, entropy and a redacted preview (secrets are never echoed); placeholders and documented example keys are marked; optional fully redacted copy of the input. Price: $0.003 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: POST https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/secret-scan

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": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "secret_scan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	Yes	Text to scan
`redact`	No	Also return the text with every finding replaced by [REDACTED:<rule>]
`maxFindings`	No
`includeGeneric`	No	Include entropy-checked generic password/secret assignments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark it read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive, and the description adds substantial behavior: rule coverage, crypto-wallet detection, entropy-checked generic assignments, redacted previews, placeholder/example marking, optional full redaction, and pricing.

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 description is front-loaded and information-dense, with the main purpose and usage context stated immediately. It is somewhat long and run-on due to the provider list, pricing, and endpoint, but those details are relevant to a secret-scanning tool.

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?

With no output schema, the description does a good job explaining return contents: line/column, severity, entropy, redacted preview, and optional fully redacted copy. It still omits the maxFindings cap and finer output/error behavior, so it is strong but not fully complete.

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 75%, with text, redact, and includeGeneric documented in the schema. The description reinforces redaction and generic password detection but does not mention maxFindings, leaving one parameter undocumented beyond its type/default/min/max.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: scanning code, config, logs, diffs, or prompts for leaked credentials. It also enumerates credential families and secret types, making the scope precise enough to distinguish it from broader siblings like pii_detect or prompt_injection_scan.

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 clearly states when to use it: before committing, sharing, or sending text to an LLM. It does not name alternative tools or when-not-to-use cases, so it falls short of full explicit routing guidance.

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?