Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

FreeTier Agent API

by dev.pages.freetier-agent-api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

ENS + Basenames resolver

ens
Read-only

3 free MCP calls per day (all tools together), then $0.0025 USDC via x402 or card credits (paid in-band: params._meta["x402/payment"]). ENS + Basenames resolver: name -> address (vitalik.eth, jesse.base.eth) or address -> verified primary name on Ethereum and Base (reverse record checked forward), plus optional text records (avatar, url, com.twitter, com.github, ...). On-chain via public RPC, no keys. When to use: Use ens to turn vitalik.eth / name.base.eth into an address before sending, or to show a verified name for an address.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoENS name (label.eth) or Basename (label.base.eth); or pass address instead
chainNoreverse lookup chains, default all
addressNo0x address for reverse lookup (primary name)
recordsNocomma list of text keys (max 8) or "all"

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "address": {
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "at": {
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "chain": {
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "method": {
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "mode": {
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "name": {
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "names": {
-    "items": {
-      "properties": {
-        "chain": {
-          "type": [
-            "string",
-            "null"
-          ]
-        },
-        "name": {
-          "type": [
-            "string",
-            "null"
-          ]
-        },
-        "verified": {
-          "type": [
-            "boolean",
-            "null"
-          ]
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  "node": {
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "primary_name": {
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "resolver": {
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "sources": {
-    "items": {
-      "properties": {
-        "name": {
-          "type": [
-            "string",
-            "null"
-          ]
-        },
-        "url": {
-          "type": [
-            "string",
-            "null"
-          ]
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  "text": {
-    "properties": {
-      "avatar": {
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "com.discord": {
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "com.github": {
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "com.twitter": {
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "description": {
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "email": {
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "org.telegram": {
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "url": {
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      }
-    },
-    "type": "object"
-  }
-}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations by disclosing the pricing model (3 free calls/day, then $0.0025 USDC via x402 or card credits), the in-band payment mechanism (params._meta["x402/payment"]), and the trust model (public RPC, no keys, reverse record checked forward). These are exactly the operational facts an agent needs to plan a call.

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?

Dense and nearly waste-free, but it leads with pricing before stating what the tool does, which delays the purpose for an agent scanning for capability first. Still, every sentence carries information and the whole thing is short.

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?

With an output schema covering return values and annotations covering the safety profile, the description fills the remaining gaps: payment handling, supported chains, record selection, and what 'verified' means for reverse lookups. Nothing needed 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: text-record keys are exemplified (avatar, url, com.twitter, com.github), the chain scope (Ethereum and Base) is stated, and the forward-verification semantics of the reverse lookup clarify what `address` + `chain` actually return.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb+resource pair: bidirectional resolution of ENS/Basenames names to addresses and verified primary names, with optional text records. The examples (vitalik.eth, jesse.base.eth) and the forward-check detail on reverse records make the capability unambiguous and distinct from any sibling tool.

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?

An explicit 'When to use' clause gives two concrete scenarios: resolve a name before sending funds, or display a verified name for an address. No other sibling tool performs name resolution, so no alternatives need to be excluded; the guidance is clear even without an explicit when-not clause.

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

All FreeTier Agent API 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