Agent Einstein — Crypto & Market Intelligence

Content Integrity Scan

check_content_integrity

Read-onlyIdempotent

AI moderation and integrity scanning for user-generated content and yield-vault listings — judges content quality and runs a deep integrity scan for manipulation. [Paid: $0.05–$1.00 per call from your Einstein credit balance. Free alternatives exist for several of these — see list_einstein_capabilities.]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	No	judge = content quality · deep_scan = manipulation scan · vaults = list scanned vaults.	judge
`content`	No	Content or vault identifier to assess.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`skill`	No	Which Einstein capability answered. These tools route onto one of many skills by an enum argument, so this names the branch that actually ran.
`reason`	No	Why there is no analysis, when `available` is false.
`analysis`	No	The written answer, identical to the result's text block. This is the field to read: the rest of the payload is whichever capability answered, and its shape varies by tool and by argument.
`available`	No	True when the analysis ran. False when it did not — no capability matched the arguments, the caller is out of credit, billing was unavailable, or the skill produced nothing. NOT a statement about the market.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 4, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "analysis": {
+      "description": "The written answer, identical to the result's text block. This is the field to read: the rest of the payload is whichever capability answered, and its shape varies by tool and by argument.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "available": {
+      "description": "True when the analysis ran. False when it did not — no capability matched the arguments, the caller is out of credit, billing was unavailable, or the skill produced nothing. NOT a statement about the market.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "reason": {
+      "description": "Why there is no analysis, when `available` is false.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "skill": {
+      "description": "Which Einstein capability answered. These tools route onto one of many skills by an enum argument, so this names the branch that actually ran.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedAug 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real-world cost context (Einstein credit balance, $0.05–$1.00) and a pointer to free alternatives, which is valuable beyond the schema and annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two tight sentences; the first front-loads the tool's function and scope, and the second adds cost/alternative context without padding. Every clause earns its place in the description.

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?

All required information is present or already structured: parameters are fully described in the schema, an output schema exists, annotations cover safety, and the description adds the crucial paid/cost dimension and free-alternative route. An agent has enough to invoke it and interpret results.

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 enum values in the schema already explain judge/deep_scan/vaults, so the description does not need to add much. The description loosely echoes the content/vault distinction but adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb ('scanning/judges') and a specific resource class ('user-generated content and yield-vault listings'), and clarifies that it covers content quality plus manipulation scanning. It is clearly distinct from token-focused or market-scan siblings, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself by name.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Mentions that free alternatives exist and points to list_einstein_capabilities, which gives cost-conscious agents a next step. However, it does not specify when to choose this tool over a sibling, which kind to invoke, or any conditions that should route an agent elsewhere.

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

All Agent Einstein — Crypto & Market Intelligence 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.