Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_sek_php

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

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?

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses the payment requirement (PAID $0.002 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453), the authoritative source (ECB fixing), fallback behavior for pegged currencies, and that results are deterministic with no estimation. What is missing is update cadence, weekend/holiday behavior when the ECB does not publish, and error/latency characteristics.

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?

It is a single dense passage with no filler; every clause (source, method, attribution, determinism) adds information. The paid-call banner is front-loaded ahead of the actual function, which is defensible for a paid tool but does delay the statement of what the tool does by a few tokens.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essentials an agent needs: what is returned (rate, rate date, derivation method, source attribution) and the commercial condition. It would be stronger if it named the response fields or stated how fresh the fixing is, but nothing critical to a correct call is absent.

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 and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly wastes no space on parameter explanation and instead spends its words on source and output semantics.

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 resource and scope: the official SEK/PHP reference rate from the ECB fixing, including how it is derived (direct, cross via EUR, or peg). That is far more precise than a bare pair name. It stops short of a 5 because it never distinguishes itself from nearby siblings such as fx_php_sek (inverse direction), fx_convert, or fx_latest, leaving the agent to infer which one answers its question.

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 'call this when you need a sourced official SEK/PHP rate rather than a computed conversion.' There is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no pointer to fx_convert for arbitrary amounts or fx_timeseries for historical series. The inverse-pair sibling fx_php_sek is not addressed at all.

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