Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_nzd_pln

[PAID $0.002 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453] Official NZD/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_nzd_pln"
  }
}

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 at all, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses the paid access model ($0.002 USDC per call, x402, eip155:8453), the upstream source (ECB fixing or official peg), the derivation method (direct, cross via EUR, or peg-derived), and guarantees determinism with no estimation. The main gaps are update cadence (how often the fixing refreshes) and behavior on non-publication days.

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 front-loaded sentence leads with the resource and its source, then layers method and attribution detail; the bracketed payment tag is compact and relevant since this is a paid endpoint. It is dense but contains no filler sentences, only mild over-packing of the tails of the clause list.

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 covers what comes back (rate, date, method, source attribution), the payment requirement, and the accuracy guarantee. The only missing pieces an agent would want are the fixing's publication cadence and how 'latest' resolves on weekends or holidays.

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, which is the baseline-4 case; there is no parameter meaning for the description to add or omit. The description correctly spends its words on output semantics (rate, rate date, method, attribution) instead of inventing argument explanation.

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 the exact resource (official NZD/PLN reference rate) and the specific source (latest European Central Bank fixing, or official peg), so an agent knows precisely which data it gets. In a family of hundreds of near-identical fx_<base>_<quote> siblings that differ only by the pair, the name plus this sentence is enough to pick the right one, though it never contrasts itself with fx_convert, fx_latest, or fx_timeseries.

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: 'latest ... fixing' signals spot/official-rate lookups and excludes historical series, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no guidance on choosing this pair tool over the generic fx_convert or fx_timeseries siblings, and no note on what to do when no fixing exists for the current day. The agent must infer all routing decisions.

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