Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_krw_cad

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
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 paid x402 model ($0.002 USDC per call on eip155:8453), the authoritative source (ECB), the fallback behavior for pegged CAD, and that values are deterministic rather than estimated. What it omits is error behavior when a fixing is unavailable and the quoting convention (KRW per CAD vs CAD per KRW).

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?

A single dense sentence with the cost/transport tag up front and the substantive description immediately after. Every clause carries information — source, fallback, returned fields, determinism — and there is no filler.

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?

Given zero parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description usefully enumerates what comes back (rate, rate date, derivation method, source attribution) and flags the payment requirement. The one meaningful gap is the quote direction, which an agent needs in order to use the number correctly.

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 the baseline of 4 applies and there is no schema surface for the description to supplement. Nothing is misdescribed or missing on this dimension.

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 resource and scope: the official KRW/CAD reference rate, sourced from the ECB fixing, with fallback to an official peg. That is far more than a restatement of the name. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like fx_convert or fx_latest, so it falls short of a 5.

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: an agent can infer this is the tool for a KRW-to-CAD reference rate, and the peg clause hints at coverage of pegged currencies. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of when to prefer fx_convert for actual conversion or fx_latest for a snapshot, and no stated failure conditions.

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