Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

test_checkout

[PAID $25 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453] Signed passive checkout-path proof for a store or product page: price/currency/availability, add-to-cart control, cart page, checkout links over https, payment provider, terms/returns/privacy/legal pages reachable, contact. Nothing added to cart, no payment.

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": "test_checkout"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesStore or product page URL

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well: it discloses that the call is paid ($25 USDC), uses x402 on eip155:8453, is passive, and does not add to cart or make a payment. It does not cover auth requirements, rate limits, or what the 'signed' response contains, but the core behavioral profile is substantially exposed.

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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence that leads with payment details and then the tool's purpose. The long comma-separated enumeration of checks is dense but every item appears relevant, with no filler sentences.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is fairly complete: it explains cost, protocol, what is checked, and that the operation is passive. It could say more about the signed proof's output or edge-case behavior, but the essential context for calling it correctly is present.

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?

There is one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents 'url' as the store or product page URL. The description reinforces the target as a store or product page but adds no syntax, format constraints, or additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb-like capability ('Signed passive checkout-path proof') and enumerates exactly what is checked for a store or product page, including price, cart, checkout links, legal pages, and contact. It is clearly more than a tautology, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from overlapping siblings such as price_availability or pre_purchase_check.

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?

The phrase 'passive checkout-path proof for a store or product page' implies when the tool is appropriate, and 'Nothing added to cart, no payment' clarifies a key constraint. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to related alternatives like price_availability or pre_purchase_check.

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