Skip to main content
Glama

ScorpTech x402 Tools

Sqrt Tail

sqrt_tail
Read-onlyIdempotent

The last term of the repeating block of sqrt(d), which is twice the integer part. sqrt(2) ends in 2, sqrt(3) ends in 2, and sqrt(10) ends in 6. A square is rejected. d runs from 1 to 100000. Price: $0.001 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: POST https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/sqrt-tail

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": {
      "d": "<d>"
    },
    "name": "sqrt_tail"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior. The description adds useful context beyond that: square inputs are rejected, the price is $0.001 USDC per successful call via x402 on Solana, and an HTTPS endpoint is available.

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 definition is front-loaded with the key mathematical meaning and examples, followed by constraints and payment/endpoint details. It is efficient overall, though the pricing and HTTPS lines add some length beyond core tool semantics.

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?

Given one required parameter, no output schema, and annotations covering safety traits, the description is largely complete: it defines the input domain, invalid input behavior, output examples, cost, and transport. It could be stronger with a more formal definition of “last term” or explicit sibling routing.

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 carry parameter meaning. It identifies d as the radicand, states the allowed range 1–100000, explains that square values are rejected, and gives example outputs that clarify the result semantics.

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?

States the specific value returned: the last term of the repeating block of sqrt(d), with examples for sqrt(2), sqrt(3), and sqrt(10). It is clear what the tool computes, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from related siblings like sqrt_period or sqrt_cf.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides domain constraints (d from 1 to 100000, squares rejected) but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus related alternatives such as sqrt_period or sqrt_cf. The agent must infer usage from the name and examples alone.

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