Kairos Signal — DePIN Telemetry

topup_credits

Add credits. Card (one call): {"method": "stripe", "amount": N} where N is $20 or $99 — returns a Stripe checkout_url already bound to your api_key, and credits post automatically once Stripe confirms payment at $1 = 1 credit. No human step and no wallet needed. USDC on Base ({"method": "usdc"}) is also accepted but requires more work: verify your sender first via POST /v1/credits/crypto/challenge and /verify with X-API-Key, sign the returned challenge with your own EOA, then pass the verified from_address and send only after a successful quote — credit requires finalized Base evidence. Instructions: https://kairossignal.com/docs/crypto.html

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`amount`	Yes	Amount in USD to add. Fixed packs only: 20 or 99. Any other value returns the available packs instead of a link.
`method`	Yes	Payment method
`api_key`	Yes	Your API key
`tx_hash`	No	Legacy optional field; a transaction hash does not replace from_address or verify payment.
`from_address`	No	Required for USDC: your EOA address already verified to this API account through the wallet challenge flow.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 14, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / amount / description

Previous value: -"Amount in USD to add"New value: +"Amount in USD to add. Fixed packs only: 20 or 99. Any other value returns the available packs instead of a link."

addedInput schema / properties / amount / enum
```
Added value: +[
+  20,
+  99
+]
```

Changed1 schema field changedSep 12, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / from_address / description

Previous value: -"Required for USDC: the exact EVM wallet address you will send from."New value: +"Required for USDC: your EOA address already verified to this API account through the wallet challenge flow."

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 6, 2026

addedInput schema / allOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "if": {
+      "properties": {
+        "method": {
+          "const": "usdc"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "method"
+      ]
+    },
+    "then": {
+      "required": [
+        "from_address"
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

addedInput schema / properties / from_address

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Required for USDC: the exact EVM wallet address you will send from.",
+  "pattern": "^0x[0-9a-fA-F]{40}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / tx_hash / description

Previous value: -"USDC transaction hash (for crypto payments)"New value: +"Legacy optional field; a transaction hash does not replace from_address or verify payment."

First observedJul 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that Stripe credits post automatically upon payment confirmation, that USDC requires a verification and signing flow, that credit depends on finalized Base evidence, and that an invalid amount returns available packs instead of a link. It also flags the legacy tx_hash field as not replacing from_address. These are meaningful behavioral disclosures.

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 information-dense yet concise. Every sentence adds necessary detail: the core action, the Stripe one-call format, the automatic credit posting, the USDC multi-step flow, and a documentation link. It front-loads the primary method and keeps the structure logical, with no filler.

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?

Given the complexity of two payment methods and the lack of an output schema, the description covers the essential return behavior (checkout_url, packs on invalid amount) and the full crypto workflow. It also notes the legacy field. Minor omissions like rate limits or error handling are not critical given the detail provided.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by showing the exact JSON body for Stripe (method and amount), explaining the USDC verification sequence, and clarifying that amount must be 20 or 99 (with out-of-range returning packs). This enriches parameter understanding without repeating schema text.

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 begins with 'Add credits' and then details two specific methods (Stripe and USDC), including exact call formats and the credit conversion rate. This clearly states the verb-resource-action and the scope, making it easy to distinguish from data-fetching siblings like list_datasets or get_stats.

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 provides clear guidance on how to use the tool for both methods, including a step-by-step for USDC and a direct call format for Stripe. It notes that 'No human step and no wallet needed' for Stripe and that USDC 'requires more work,' which helps agents choose the appropriate method. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or name alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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

All Kairos Signal — DePIN Telemetry 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?