Skip to main content
Glama

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

fx_dkk_mxn

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

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?

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the paid x402 cost ($0.002 USDC on eip155:8453), the data provenance (ECB), determinism ('no estimate'), and the peg fallback behavior. It does not cover failure modes or whether a payment handshake is required first.

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?

A single dense sentence with the payment/transport detail bracketed out front and the substantive claim following. Nothing is wasted, though the bracketed pricing prefix competes with the actual purpose for the agent's attention.

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 no-parameter, no-output-schema lookup tool this covers the essentials: source, method, freshness semantics, and response fields. Only the payment precondition and error/pagination behavior are left unstated.

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?

Zero input parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description instead documents the shape of what comes back (rate date, derivation method, source attribution), which is meaningful since no output schema exists.

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?

States a specific resource and scope: the DKK/MXN reference rate from the ECB fixing, with peg fallback. The pair is unambiguous and the name itself separates it from the hundreds of fx_* siblings, though the description never names fx_convert or fx_latest as related operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the pair-specific naming and 'latest ... fixing', but there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-to-use fx_convert (conversion math) or fx_timeseries (history). An agent must infer that this returns a single current quote rather than performing a conversion.

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.