FREE router. Tell LION what you need in plain language. Returns the one paid path to call next (wallet screen $0.001, company research $0.03, enrich $0.04, compliance $0.05, VCF $0.95). Call this first when unsure which tool to use.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| need | Yes | What you need in plain language |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / categoryRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Optional category hint, e.g. enrichment, location, token_risk, market_data.",
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / max_price_usdcRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Optional max price per call you would pay in USDC.",
- "type": "number"
-}Input schema / properties / need / descriptionPrevious value: -"Plain-language description of what you need, e.g. \"company enrichment for a domain\", \"solar potential for an address\", \"is this Base token a honeypot\"."New value: +"What you need in plain language"Output schema / (root)Previous value: -{
- "properties": {
- "declared_need": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "free_sample": {
- "properties": {
- "call_example": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "description": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "endpoint": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "free_tool": {
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "type": "object"
- },
- "matched_capability": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "note": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "ref": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "upgrade_to_paid": {
- "properties": {
- "curl_example": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "endpoint": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "how_to_pay": {
- "type": "object"
- },
- "paid_tool": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "payment": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "price_usdc": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "recommendation": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "value_comparison": {
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "type": "object"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "declared_need",
- "free_sample",
- "upgrade_to_paid"
- ],
- "type": "object"
-}New value: +nullOutput schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "declared_need": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "free_sample": {
+ "properties": {
+ "call_example": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "description": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "endpoint": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "free_tool": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "matched_capability": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "note": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "ref": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "upgrade_to_paid": {
+ "properties": {
+ "curl_example": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "endpoint": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "how_to_pay": {
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "paid_tool": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "payment": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "price_usdc": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "recommendation": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "value_comparison": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "declared_need",
+ "free_sample",
+ "upgrade_to_paid"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Input schema / properties / category / descriptionPrevious value: -"Optional category hint, e.g. location, token_risk, market_data, enrichment."New value: +"Optional category hint, e.g. enrichment, location, token_risk, market_data."Input schema / properties / need / descriptionPrevious value: -"Plain-language description of what you need, e.g. \"solar potential for an address\", \"is this Base token a honeypot\", \"live DEX price for a Base pair\"."New value: +"Plain-language description of what you need, e.g. \"company enrichment for a domain\", \"solar potential for an address\", \"is this Base token a honeypot\"."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is FREE, that it returns a path rather than executing the action, and lists the costs of the paid alternatives. It does not mention error handling or fallback behavior, but for a routing tool this is sufficient and transparent about its non-mutating nature.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences with zero fluff. The 'FREE router' label is front-loaded for immediate identification, and the pricing list is concise yet informative. Every sentence earns its place, and the structure aids quick scanning.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple dispatch tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what the tool does, what it returns, the available paid paths, and when to use it. The agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly without additional context.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema already describes the sole parameter 'need' as 'What you need in plain language' (100% coverage). The description adds no new semantic detail beyond restating the plain-language instruction, so it offers marginal value over the schema and meets the baseline for high coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a clear verb ('Tell LION what you need'), a specific resource (the router), and its output (the paid path to call next). It distinguishes itself from siblings by being the FREE entry point and explicitly listing the paid alternatives, so an agent knows this is the dispatch tool rather than a direct data action.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly tells when to use it: 'Call this first when unsure which tool to use.' It also provides a mapping of needs to the paid tools with costs, which guides the agent's routing decision and effectively contrasts it with the sibling tools that actually perform the work.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.