Skip to main content
Glama

Lucas Index

lucas_index
Read-onlyIdempotent

The smallest index n with L(n) equal to value. 2 is index 0, and 1 is index 1. A number that is not a Lucas number, or a leading zero, is rejected. value is a decimal integer of at most 600 digits. Price: $0.001 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: POST https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/lucas-index

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": "lucas_index"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only and idempotent annotations, the description discloses rejection conditions, the 600-digit input limit, the paid x402/Solana model, cost per successful call, and a direct HTTPS endpoint. These are important behavioral and operational details an agent needs before invoking the tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core semantics, then adds indexing rules, rejection behavior, input limits, and payment/transport details. Every sentence contributes useful information for correct invocation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter mathematical lookup with no output schema, the description is complete: it defines the result, indexing convention, validation failures, input size limit, and payment/API access. An agent has enough information to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

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 full burden for the single parameter. It explains that value is a decimal integer up to 600 digits, that a leading zero is rejected, and that the value must be an actual Lucas number.

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?

The description states a specific computational verb and resource: finding the smallest index n such that L(n) equals the supplied value. It includes the indexing convention and rejection rules, which clearly distinguish it from sibling tools like lucas that likely compute a Lucas number from an index.

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: convert a Lucas number back to its index, with explicit rejection for non-Lucas numbers and leading zeros. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as lucas, but the inverse relationship is unambiguous from the stated operation.

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