Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_xof_try

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does add real value: cost ($0.002 USDC/call), payment protocol (x402, eip155:8453), determinism, and no-estimate semantics. It leaves gaps on what happens on payment failure, whether the fixing can be stale on holidays/weekends, and whether 'latest' means last published or today's fixing.

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?

Compact and dense, with the returned fields enumerated in a single clause. The payment/x402 banner is front-loaded ahead of the actual purpose, which is a slight ordering flaw for an agent scanning for what the tool does, but the sentence earns its length.

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 does the work of describing the return payload: rate, rate date, derivation method (direct, cross via EUR, or peg-derived), and source attribution. That is sufficient for an agent to call it and interpret the result; only staleness/failure behavior is unaddressed.

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, and the description correctly implies the call is self-contained (the currency pair is baked into the tool name).

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 combination: the official XOF/TRY reference rate, sourced from the ECB fixing or the official peg. The rate pair is unambiguous and the sourcing is named, so an agent knows exactly what is returned. It stops short of distinguishing itself from siblings like fx_convert 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: the word 'latest' signals this is a spot-rate tool and the peg/fixing language signals reference-rate semantics, which implicitly routes history requests to fx_timeseries. However, no alternative is named and there is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance despite hundreds of near-identical fx_* siblings.

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