Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_try_xof

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
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 it does a good job: it discloses the price and payment scheme ($0.002 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453), the upstream authority (ECB), the peg behavior for XOF, and that the result is deterministic with no estimation. It omits failure behavior (what happens when no fixing exists, staleness limits) and response format details.

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?

Payment terms are front-loaded in a bracketed prefix, followed by one dense sentence that covers source, method, and return fields, then a short qualifier. No sentence is filler and the important constraints appear first.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description must explain the return payload, and it does list rate date, method (direct/cross/peg-derived), and source attribution. It falls short only on value formatting/precision and error or missing-fixing behavior, which an agent calling a paid endpoint would want.

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 no parameter semantics to explain and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies a parameterless call by fixing both currencies in the tool name.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb+resource pair ('Official TRY/XOF reference rate') and pins the exact data source ('latest European Central Bank fixing') plus the peg fallback, so an agent knows precisely which of the many fx_* pair tools this is. It also distinguishes the value from derived/estimated rates.

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 fixed currency pair and 'latest' framing suggest a single-rate lookup rather than fx_convert, fx_timeseries, or fx_latest, but no alternative is named and no when-not-to-use condition is stated. The paid-call cost gives a soft signal to avoid redundant calls, but not explicit routing guidance.

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