Skip to main content
Glama

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

fx_idr_chf

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

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 full burden and does well: it discloses cost ($0.002 USDC via x402 on eip155:8453), the authoritative source (ECB), the peg fallback, and the exact fields returned (rate date, method, attribution). The remaining gap is freshness cadence and failure behavior when no fixing is available.

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 plus a bracketed payment tag; every clause adds information (source, fallback, returned fields, determinism). The pricing prefix occupies prime front-loaded position, which is useful but slightly displaces the actual purpose statement.

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, no-output-schema lookup tool, the description supplies the source, the resolution method, the returned metadata and the cost model — enough to call it confidently. Only update frequency and error conditions 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?

The tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to compensate for. It correctly avoids restating an empty schema.

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 verb-and-resource: the official IDR/CHF reference rate sourced from the latest ECB fixing, including the peg fallback. The currency pair is unambiguous and separates it from the other fx_* siblings, though it never names the related tools (fx_convert, fx_timeseries, fx_latest) that an agent might confuse it with.

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 can infer it should call this when it needs an official, sourced IDR/CHF rate rather than an estimate. There is no explicit when-not guidance (e.g., for historical series use fx_timeseries, for amount conversion use fx_convert) and no prerequisites are stated.

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.