Synthex Forge — x402 Paid Agent Services

Create Code Review Brief

create_code_review_brief

Destructive

Utils Code Review Brief. use it rather than create_attested_financial_evidence for code review brief, not attested financial evidence; an object with 13 fields including category, description. $0.15 USDC.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`code`	No	The code this operation operates on. See the schema for its type and whether it is required.
`language`	No	The language this operation operates on. See the schema for its type and whether it is required.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	No	The `kind` field of the response.
`issues`	No	The `issues` field of the response.
`utility`	No	The `utility` field of the response.
`category`	No	The `category` field of the response.
`language`	No	The `language` field of the response.
`severity`	No	The `severity` field of the response.
`disclaimer`	No	The `disclaimer` field of the response.
`line_count`	No	The `line_count` field of the response.
`description`	No	The `description` field of the response.
`issue_count`	No	The `issue_count` field of the response.
`suggestions`	No	The `suggestions` field of the response.
`security_flags`	No	The `security_flags` field of the response.
`utility_result`	No	The `utility_result` field of the response.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed14 schema fields changedOct 31, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / category

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `category` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / description

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `description` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / disclaimer

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `disclaimer` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / issue_count

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `issue_count` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / issues

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `issues` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / kind

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `kind` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / language

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `language` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / line_count

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `line_count` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / security_flags

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `security_flags` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / severity

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `severity` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / status

Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / suggestions

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `suggestions` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / utility

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `utility` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / utility_result

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `utility_result` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description adds genuinely useful context not in the annotations: a price of $0.15 USDC and an output shape. However, annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, and the description says nothing about what is destroyed, whether repeat calls double-charge, or what payment/authorization is required for a paid operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is short, but the structure is garbled: a fragment title, a run-on disambiguation clause, and a dangling field list. The most decision-relevant item (what the tool does) never appears, while secondary details (field count, price) are front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a paid, destructive, non-idempotent operation, the description omits what the tool actually produces, what the destructive effect is, and any payment or authorization prerequisite. An output schema exists, yet the description still partially (and confusingly) describes returns with fields absent from the input schema.

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% for the two parameters (code, language), so the schema carries the parameter documentation burden. The description adds nothing about the parameters, and the "category, description" fields it mentions are not inputs at all, which risks confusion rather than clarity.

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

Purpose2/5

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

"Utils Code Review Brief" essentially restates the tool name and title without stating what operation is performed or what a brief contains. The only substantive additions are the output shape ("an object with 13 fields including category, description") and the price, neither of which explains the purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly routes the agent away from a named sibling: "use it rather than `create_attested_financial_evidence` for code review brief, not attested financial evidence." That is a clear use-this-not-that condition. No other exclusions or prerequisites are given, but the key disambiguation is present.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Synthex Forge — x402 Paid Agent Services tools Inspect

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.