Skip to main content
Glama

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

fx_aud_idr

[PAID $0.002 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453] Official AUD/IDR reference rate: latest European Central Bank fixing (or the official peg when IDR is pegged), with the rate date, the method (direct, cross via EUR or peg-derived) and the source attribution. Deterministic, sourced, no estimate.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "fx_aud_idr"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses payment terms ($0.002 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453) and the data source/methodology (latest ECB fixing, official peg fallback, method, attribution, no estimate), though it does not cover rate limits or error behavior.

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 definition is compact and front-loads the payment note followed by the core purpose. Every clause adds useful information about cost, source, fallback behavior, method, or attribution.

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 zero-parameter, single-purpose rate tool with no output schema, the description gives enough detail to call it and understand the response shape: rate, date, method, and source attribution. It also clearly flags the payment mechanism and data quality guarantees.

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?

The tool has zero input parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description appropriately adds no misleading parameter details, matching the baseline for a no-parameter tool.

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?

It names the exact currency pair (AUD/IDR) and the precise resource: an official reference rate, including fallback behavior for a pegged IDR. It is clear but does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as fx_convert or fx_latest.

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?

There is no explicit instruction on when to use this tool versus fx_convert, fx_latest, or other FX tools. The intended use is implied by 'official AUD/IDR reference rate', but the agent must infer it.

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.