P0: x402 service search

by dev.workers.x402-bazaar-rank-worker.x402-bazaar-rank

Best service for task

best_service_for_task

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when a router agent must pick which paid x402 service to send a task to: send the task in plain words, get the top listing from P0's snapshot of listed x402 services plus up to 4 alternatives. Returns the paid x402 request for your input (GET /route, $0.01 per call; schema linked). Call that URL with an x402 or MPP client to get the data. Bad input is refused before any charge. Paid pick of one service for one task; for free browsing and comparing use search_x402_services. With an access key (Authorization: Bearer p0k_..., buy at https://x402-bazaar-rank.x402-bazaar-rank-worker.workers.dev/keys/buy?usd=5) the tool pays the call itself, returns the data and deducts the price. First call each day returns the data itself, free; later calls return the paid request.

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": {
      "task": "<task>"
    },
    "name": "best_service_for_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task`	Yes	the task in plain words, e.g. 'screen a wallet address for sanctions' (2-200 characters)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses pricing ($0.01 per call, GET /route), the paid-request return flow, refusal of bad input before charge, access-key behavior including a purchase URL, and the first-call-per-day free exception. These are exactly the behavioral details an agent needs before invoking a paid router, and they do not contradict the readOnly/idempotent annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core routing purpose and then layers on pricing, return modes, and alternatives. It is information-dense and mostly efficient, though the long embedded URLs and multiple payment-mode clauses make it denser than ideal.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining returns: top listing plus alternatives, a paid x402 request, or actual data when an access key is used or on the first daily call. That covers the main return paths, though the exact data shape when an access key is used 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 coverage is 100% and the single 'task' parameter is already documented with a plain-words example and 2-200 character bounds. The description reinforces 'send the task in plain words' but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: pick which paid x402 service a router agent should send a task to, returning a top listing plus up to 4 alternatives. It also explicitly contrasts itself with the free-browsing sibling search_x402_services, so the agent can distinguish it without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It names the exact scenario ('Use when a router agent must pick which paid x402 service'), the input form (task in plain words), and the alternative for free browsing/comparison ('use search_x402_services'). The when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance is explicit.

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

All P0: x402 service search 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.

Resources

Need Help?