Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_inr_pln

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the load and does substantially well: it discloses the paid x402 requirement with an exact price and chain id, plus data provenance (ECB fixing, peg fallback, direct vs EUR-cross derivation) and a determinism guarantee. It omits error/payment-failure behavior and freshness cadence, keeping it short of 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the cost/payment marker so an agent cannot miss the billing implication before calling. The second sentence is dense but every clause (rate date, method, attribution, no estimate) adds distinct information; only 'deterministic, sourced, no estimate' is mildly redundant with the provenance already stated.

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 lookup with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what an agent needs to decide and call: source, price, return fields (rate date, method, attribution), and the pegged-currency edge case. What is missing is operational detail such as refresh frequency and what a payment or source failure returns.

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; baseline 4 applies. It correctly spends no words on inputs and instead documents what the fixed response will contain.

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?

The description names a specific operation and resource: the official INR/PLN reference rate, sourced from the European Central Bank fixing, with a fallback rule when PLN is pegged. Among hundreds of fx_* siblings it makes clear this is a single-pair spot lookup rather than conversion, time series, or a general 'latest' feed.

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 only implied: 'latest' fixing signals a current-value lookup, so an agent can infer that historical series belong to fx_timeseries and cross-rate math to fx_convert, but the description never says so. There are no explicit when-not conditions or named alternatives, which matters given the very large sibling set of near-identical pair tools.

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