Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_xaf_nok

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

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 substantial work: it discloses the paid cost ($0.002 USDC/call), x402 payment protocol, chain (eip155:8453), the ECB source, and that the value is deterministic with no estimate, plus that the derivation method is returned. It omits failure/edge behavior such as what happens on weekends, holidays, or before the daily ECB publication, and says nothing about staleness tolerance.

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 dense sentence with the price/payment prefix front-loaded so the agent sees the cost before committing. Every clause (source, derivation method, attribution, determinism) carries information, though the run-on construction slightly hurts scanability.

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 lookup with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers everything needed to select and call it: cost, payment rail, data source, output contents (rate, rate date, method, attribution), and trust characteristics. Nothing required to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 meaning to add; the baseline for a 0-param tool is 4. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed by fully specifying the pair in the name and body.

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 resource (XAF/NOK) and authoritative source (European Central Bank fixing), plus what is returned: rate date, derivation method, and attribution. The pair-specific naming already separates it from the hundreds of fx_* siblings, but the description never names a contrasting sibling (e.g. fx_convert or fx_timeseries), so it stops short of full differentiation.

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 'latest European Central Bank fixing' — you call it to get the current official rate for this pair. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no pointer to fx_convert for arithmetic or fx_timeseries for history, leaving the agent to infer boundaries from the naming convention alone.

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