Skip to main content
Glama

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

fx_ron_usd

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

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 payment model and amount ($0.002 USDC via x402 on eip155:8453), that results are deterministic and sourced with no estimation, and which provenance fields accompany the rate. It stops short of describing behavior when no ECB fixing exists (weekends/holidays) or error responses.

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 tight sentence preceded by a bracketed payment tag. The pricing prefix is front-loaded and the substantive content follows without redundancy; only minor tightening is possible.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

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 lookup, the description enumerates the meaningful return contents (rate date, derivation method including cross-via-EUR or peg, source attribution) plus cost and payment mechanism. An agent has everything needed to decide and call 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 there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly frames the call as parameter-free by naming the exact pair.

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 verb+resource: the 'Official RON/USD reference rate' sourced from the 'latest European Central Bank fixing'. The currency pair is unambiguous even among hundreds of fx_* siblings, but the description never explicitly 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 by the data provenance ('official ECB fixing', 'no estimate'), which signals this is for authoritative reference rates rather than ad-hoc conversion. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no routing to sibling tools like fx_convert or fx_timeseries.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.