ScorpTech x402 API

Identicon Svg

identicon_svg

Read-onlyIdempotent

Deterministic avatar SVG for any user id, email, wallet address or name — the same input always gives the same image, with no storage or external service. Styles: identicon (GitHub-style symmetric 5×5 grid), pixel (8×8 symmetric sprite), initials (coloured badge with up to two initials, readable text colour chosen by WCAG contrast) and gradient (two-tone ring). Returns the SVG markup, a data: URI ready for , the palette, and the Gravatar MD5 hash for emails. Price: $0.001 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: GET https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/identicon-svg

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": "identicon_svg"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No	Display name for initials (default: derived from value)
`size`	No
`style`	No		identicon
`value`	Yes	Any identifier (email, username, address, name)
`rounded`	No	Circle / rounded-square mask
`background`	No		#f0f0f0

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations, which only cover read-only/idempotent safety: it declares determinism, that no storage or third-party service is involved, the exact return fields (SVG, data: URI, palette, MD5 hash), and a per-call price of $0.001 USDC via x402 on Solana. The paid-call and no-persistence disclosures are exactly the kind of context an agent cannot get from structured fields.

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 purpose and determinism claim are front-loaded, and the style enumeration and return fields are compactly packed into one dense block. The closing HTTPS/x402 line is useful but adds length; nothing is truly redundant.

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?

For a 6-parameter tool with no output schema, it covers the essentials — what is returned, what it costs, and how styles differ. Minor incompleteness on size/rounded/background semantics is acceptable given the schema carries defaults and a regex pattern.

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 coverage is 50%, and the description compensates for the largest gap by explaining all four enum values in concrete terms (5×5 grid, 8×8 sprite, WCAG-contrast initials, two-tone ring) and what 'value' accepts. It says nothing about size, rounded, or background, leaving those to their defaults and the schema pattern.

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+resource — 'Deterministic avatar SVG' — plus the input domain (user id, email, wallet address, name). The four named styles pin down exactly what kind of output it produces, which cleanly separates it from sibling generators like qr_generate or chart_svg.

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?

The description makes the use case clear: derive a stable avatar from any identifier without storage or an external service. It never names an alternative tool or a when-not condition, so the agent must infer boundaries itself.

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?