Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_mxn_aud

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

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 it does substantial work: it discloses the price ($0.002 USDC/call), the payment protocol and chain (x402, eip155:8453), the upstream source (ECB fixing with peg fallback), and that the response carries rate date, method, and attribution. Remaining gaps are output shape and refresh cadence, but the cost/auth/source profile an agent needs before paying is present.

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 compact sentences with zero waste; the payment tag is bracketed up front so a cost-sensitive agent can decide immediately, and the substantive rate description follows without filler. Every clause (source, fallback, returned fields, no-estimate caveat) carries information.

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, deterministic lookup with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers source, fallback behavior, and the fields returned, which is close to sufficient. It leaves open the quote direction convention and whether stale/last-known fixings are returned on holidays, minor but real gaps for an FX consumer.

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 (empty object schema), so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies the call is fully determined by the tool name itself.

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 (official MXN/AUD reference rate) and its provenance (latest ECB fixing, or the official peg when AUD is pegged), which is enough to distinguish it from the fx_convert/fx_latest/fx_timeseries siblings. It stops short of spelling out the base/quote direction convention, which matters given that a sibling fx_aud_mxn exists and the two return reciprocals rather than identical values.

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: the description makes clear this yields the authoritative published rate and explicitly says 'no estimate', which implicitly steers the agent away from derived or computed figures. There is no explicit when-to-use versus fx_convert or fx_timeseries, and no statement about freshness or what happens on non-fixing days.

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