Fuci

Tide Oracle

fucus_oracle

Read-onlyIdempotent

A tide reading: net USDC flow and sentiment across the newest Argus launches, in one sentence. Price: $0.0005 USDC (x402).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`launches`	No	How many of the newest launches to read trades from (1–6, default 4)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes	URL to call; it answers 402 with the price, then the data once paid
`body`	No	JSON body for POST tools
`method`	Yes	HTTP method to call with an x402 client

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 26, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / launches

Added value: +{
+  "description": "How many of the newest launches to read trades from (1–6, default 4)",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

First observedSep 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description does not need to restate these. It adds value by disclosing the cost ($0.0005 USDC) and the output format ('in one sentence'), which are behavioral details not captured elsewhere. It does not describe potential side effects, but given the annotations, this is sufficient.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is extremely concise, packing purpose, scope, and cost into two short sentences. It is front-loaded with the core function and adds the price as a secondary detail. There is no wasted wording or repetition of schema information.

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?

Given the low complexity (one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the tool's purpose, cost, and output format. It could optionally elaborate on what 'sentiment' entails, but that is likely defined elsewhere. Overall, it provides enough information for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema fully documents the 'launches' parameter, including its type, default value, and valid range (1–6). The description does not add any additional context about how this parameter influences the reading, so it adds no value beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, a baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool's function: providing a 'tide reading' of net USDC flow and sentiment across the newest Argus launches. This is a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from sibling tools like argus_launches (which likely lists launches) and fuci_risk (risk assessment). The output format 'in one sentence' further clarifies what the agent will receive.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description does not provide any explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. It does not mention alternatives or conditions that would make this tool the preferred choice. The only implicit signal is the phrase 'newest Argus launches', which hints at a specific scope, but no exclusions or comparisons are given.

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

All Fuci 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.