Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_eur_php

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
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 does well: it discloses the price ($0.002 USDC/call), the payment protocol (x402, eip155:8453), the data provenance (ECB fixing, official peg), and that values are deterministic and non-estimated rather than model-generated. It stops short of describing failure modes, staleness bounds, or what happens if no fixing exists for the date, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the cost and protocol before the substantive description of the data. Every clause adds information: source, fallback, rate date, method, attribution, and non-estimation guarantee. No filler or restatement of the name.

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, no-output-schema tool, the description enumerates the payload contents (rate, rate date, derivation method, source attribution) plus the payment and provenance story. There is no structural field left to compensate for, so an agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the result.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies the pair and source are baked in rather than supplied by the caller, which is the one semantic fact that matters here.

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?

States a specific resource (EUR/PHP reference rate) and pins the authoritative source: the latest ECB fixing, with a documented fallback to the official peg when PHP is pegged. The pair is unambiguous from the name and the description confirms scope, so an agent can distinguish this from the hundreds of sibling fx_* pair tools without opening a schema.

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 rather than stated: an agent infers this is the tool for a single ECB reference rate and that non-ECB pairs or computed conversions belong elsewhere (fx_convert, fx_timeseries), but neither alternative nor an exclusion is named. The peg fallback is disclosed, but the agent must reason about when the reference rate is versus is not the right thing to quote.

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

All Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks toolsInspect
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