Skip to main content
Glama

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

fx_dkk_huf

[PAID $0.002 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453] Official DKK/HUF reference rate: latest European Central Bank fixing (or the official peg when HUF 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_dkk_huf"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses important behavior: a paid x402 call costing $0.002 USDC on eip155:8453, sourced ECB data, deterministic output, no estimates, and handling of the HUF peg. It does not cover failure modes or freshness beyond 'latest fixing'.

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 description is a compact, front-loaded sentence with payment terms bracketed first and the result semantics immediately after. Every clause adds information, though the bracketed payment metadata makes the opening slightly bulky.

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 zero-parameter reference-rate tool with no output schema, the description is complete enough: it explains the data source, fixing method, rate date, attribution, peg behavior, and payment requirement. It could be more explicit about alternatives and what happens when no fixing exists.

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 parameters, so parameter semantics are inherently trivial and the schema carries no gaps. The description adds no parameter detail because none is needed.

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?

The description states a specific verb/resource: the official DKK/HUF reference rate from the latest ECB fixing, with method and attribution. The currency pair is explicit, but it never routes the agent to related siblings such as fx_convert, fx_latest, fx_timeseries, or the inverse fx_huf_dkk.

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?

It implies this is the lookup for the DKK/HUF official reference rate, but gives no when-to-use vs. alternatives guidance. An agent must infer whether to use fx_convert for arbitrary pairs, fx_latest for most recent rates, or fx_timeseries for history.

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.