ScorpTech x402 API

Chmod Apply

chmod_apply

Read-onlyIdempotent

Apply a chmod mode to a starting mode. The grammar is GNU chmod: symbolic [ugoa]([-+=][rwxXst] or one of ugo), comma separated, or =644 / +1, or a bare octal. No spaces. If who is omitted, bits set in umask are not changed; the default umask is 0. Explicit who ignores umask. X adds execute only on a directory, or when an execute bit is already set. On a directory, bare octal shorter than five digits keeps set-user-ID and set-group-ID; =755, 00755, or a symbolic s clears them. The sticky bit is not kept across = or bare octal. Price: $0.001 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: GET https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/chmod-apply

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": {
      "mode": "<mode>",
      "spec": "<spec>"
    },
    "name": "chmod_apply"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`mode`	Yes
`spec`	Yes
`umask`	No	0
`directory`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: umask interaction, X execute-bit semantics, set-user-ID/set-group-ID preservation on directories, sticky-bit handling, and x402 pricing/endpoint details. These are consistent with the readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive annotations.

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 dense but front-loaded, starting with the core operation before grammar and edge cases. Most sentences carry relevant technical information, though the single-block presentation could be more structured for such detailed semantics.

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?

The definition covers input behavior and edge cases well, but there is no output schema and the description never states what the tool returns or its result shape. For a calculation-style tool with no output schema, that is a meaningful completeness gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains chmod grammar, umask behavior, and directory-specific semantics, but it never explicitly maps those details to the 'mode' versus 'spec' parameters, leaving an important ambiguity.

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 specific operation: applying a GNU chmod-style transformation to a starting mode, with concrete grammar examples. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish itself from plausible siblings such as file_mode, umask_mode, or permission_check.

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?

The description gives syntax constraints such as 'No spaces' and detailed chmod semantics, but it never states when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. Usage is only implied by the opening operation description.

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

All ScorpTech x402 API 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?