Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

site_audit_quick

[PAID $5 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453] Quick Bierus website audit (audit-live engine, 6 steps): reads the site, asks AI assistants (Google AI Mode/Overview, ChatGPT, an LLM), checks online reputation, Lighthouse mobile speed and security headers, then writes findings with evidence and a PDF report (EN/FR). Async: job_id + free result_url; typically about 2 min of work (66-190 s measured) plus queue. Pay on delivery: settled only when the report is delivered; a failed or blocked audit is never charged.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "site_audit_quick"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesPublic website URL or domain, e.g. https://www.example.com
cityNoCity of the business (optional, helps AI and reputation checks)
langNoReport language for the quick audit (en default, fr)
nameNoBusiness name as it should appear (default: from the domain)
sectorNoBusiness sector, e.g. 'dentist', 'perfume e-shop'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / city
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "City of the business (optional, helps AI and reputation checks)",
+  "maxLength": 60,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / lang
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Report language for the quick audit (en default, fr)",
+  "enum": [
+    "en",
+    "fr"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With zero annotations the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses the $5 USDC price, the x402 payment protocol and network (eip155:8453), the pay-on-delivery settlement rule, and that failed or blocked audits are never charged. It also states the measured runtime (66-190 s plus queue) and that the report is issued as a PDF in EN/FR. Minor gap: it does not say how the result is later retrieved beyond the result_url.

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?

The pricing/payment banner is front-loaded ahead of the capability description, and the step list is packed into a compact sentence. It is dense rather than bloated, though the single long sentence is heavier than ideal for scanning.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by explaining the async return shape (job_id plus a free result_url) and the delivered artifact (PDF report with evidence). Given the five simple, fully documented parameters, an agent has enough to invoke it correctly; only the follow-up retrieval path is left implicit.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are already documented in the schema and the baseline is 3. The description adds only that the report language is EN/FR and that 'city' feeds the AI and reputation checks, which is marginal extra meaning beyond the schema text.

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?

Specific verb and resource: a 6-step quick website audit that reads the site, queries AI assistants, checks reputation, Lighthouse speed and security headers, and produces findings plus a PDF. The word 'Quick' gestures at the sibling site_audit_full, but the description never names it or states the tradeoff, so sibling differentiation is only implied.

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 context is implied through the async flow ('job_id + free result_url') and the ~2 min delivery window, which tells an agent how to call and what to expect. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious alternatives (site_audit_full, seo_full_audit, test_website) or when to prefer them over this paid call.

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