ScorpTech x402 Tools

User Agent Parse

user_agent_parse

Read-onlyIdempotent

Parse User-Agent strings: browser and version, rendering engine, OS and version, device type (mobile, tablet, desktop, TV, console, bot) with vendor/model, and bot detection that names 100+ crawlers and HTTP clients by operator and category, including AI crawlers and AI assistants (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Bytespider, CCBot, meta-externalagent...), search, social, SEO and monitoring bots and scripted clients (curl, python-requests, headless Chrome). Up to 50 UAs per call. Price: $0.002 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: GET https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/user-agent-parse

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": "user_agent_parse"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ua`	No	One User-Agent string
`uas`	No	Several User-Agent strings (JSON array; commas inside UAs break the comma-list form)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds the details that actually matter for this tool: a hard cost of $0.002 USDC per successful call via x402 on Solana, plus a parallel HTTPS route. Pricing and payment protocol are behavioral facts an agent cannot get from annotations or schema, so this earns top marks.

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 verb and outputs, with price/endpoint correctly pushed to the end. The long parenthetical enumeration of bot names (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, Bytespider, CCBot...) is illustrative but longer than strictly necessary for an agent to decide.

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 carries the return-value burden and does so by enumerating result fields. Payment model and batch limits are covered; remaining gaps are minor (response encoding, how partial failures in a 50-item batch are billed/reported).

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 100% — both `ua` and `uas` are documented with maxLength/maxItems and even a note on comma-list breakage — so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates the 50-item batch limit already encoded in maxItems and does not clarify when to prefer `ua` over `uas`.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ("Parse User-Agent strings") and then enumerates exactly what the output covers: browser/version, engine, OS/version, device type with vendor/model, and bot detection. This is clearly distinguishable from nearby siblings like email_parse, url_parse, or headers_audit.

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?

The batch ceiling ("Up to 50 UAs per call") and the HTTPS alternative endpoint give useful operating context, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not guidance and no reference to sibling tooling. Usage is implied by the input description rather than stated.

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?