ScorpTech x402 API

Float Round

float_round

Read-onlyIdempotent

Round an exact decimal or fraction to binary32 or binary64. Modes are nearestEven, towardZero, towardPositive, and towardNegative. Ties in nearestEven go to an even fraction bit. Overflow becomes infinity, or the largest finite value when the mode points toward zero. underflow is set only when the result is subnormal or zero and not exact. Price: $0.001 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: GET https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/float-round

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": {
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "float_round"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`mode`	No	nearestEven
`value`	Yes
`width`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive), and the description goes further by disclosing tie-breaking, overflow-to-infinity vs. saturation, and the exact underflow flag condition — genuinely non-obvious IEEE-754 behavior. It also discloses cost ($0.001 USDC per successful call via x402) and an alternate HTTPS endpoint, which the annotations cannot convey. No contradiction with the read-only/idempotent hints.

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-loads the operation, then modes, then numeric edge cases, with cost and endpoint last — a sensible ordering. Dense but each sentence carries information; only the duplicated endpoint/pricing trailer is slightly extraneous for tool selection.

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?

Behavioral semantics are well covered for a numeric tool with no output schema, but the return value is only hinted at ("underflow is set"), leaving unclear whether the result is a bit pattern, hex string, or decimal. Combined with 0% schema description coverage, an agent still has gaps on parameter naming and output shape.

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 carries the burden: it enumerates all four mode values and both widths in prose and clarifies that `value` may be a decimal OR a fraction (material beyond the untyped `string` property). However it never ties these to the parameter names `mode`/`width`/`value`, doesn't mention the nearestEven and 64 defaults, and says nothing about the 4000-character limit.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Round an exact decimal or fraction to binary32 or binary64"), which distinguishes it from the many float siblings (float_bits, float_next, float_ulp, float_order) by naming the exact operation and target formats. An agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is implied by the semantics (round an exact value to a specific IEEE format), but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no pointer to alternatives such as float_next or float_bits. The mode names are listed but the description doesn't say which mode to pick when, leaving the agent to infer defaults.

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?