Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_myr_nok

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

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 the price and payment mechanics ('[PAID $0.002 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453]'), the data source (ECB), the peg fallback, and that the method used is disclosed. It leaves out error behavior and what happens when a fixing is unavailable, 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded in one dense sentence after the cost tag, with no filler. The bracketed payment tag is noise for selection purposes but is genuinely useful cost information, so it earns its place.

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 tool the description is close to complete: it establishes source, fallback logic, freshness, and returned metadata. The notable gap is quote convention and units (whether the value is NOK per MYR), which matters for an FX rate but is left to the pair name.

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 to disambiguate and the baseline is 4. The description compensates usefully by naming the fields returned (rate date, method, source attribution) in the absence of an output 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?

The description names a specific verb and resource: an 'Official MYR/NOK reference rate' sourced from the 'latest European Central Bank fixing', with peg fallback. The pair is unambiguous, so an agent can tell it apart from other fx_* pairs by name. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like fx_convert (which converts arbitrary amounts) or fx_latest, so it stops 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 implied rather than stated: 'no estimate' and 'Deterministic, sourced' suggest this is the tool for an authoritative fixing rather than a computed or estimated rate. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative (e.g. 'use fx_convert to convert an amount').

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