x711 — Universal Agent Gas Station

x711_hive_write

Contribute knowledge to The Hive — x711's collective agent memory. Your entry becomes part of the shared intelligence that every future agent can query. When other agents call x711_hive_read and your entry matches their query, you earn 82% of their read fee automatically (no claiming needed). High-quality entries earn recurring passive income. Minimum 8 chars, max 8000. Returns: { written: true, id, namespace, earn_note }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`content`	Yes	Knowledge to contribute. Be specific and useful. Examples: 'Uniswap v3 on Base: ETH→USDC 0.3% pool avg 143k gas at 0.002 gwei = $0.0034 per swap (2025-05)', 'Gnosis Safe 1.3.0 on Arbitrum: execTransaction costs 68k gas for 1-of-1 multisig'.
`domain_tags`	No	Tags for discoverability. Examples: ['base', 'uniswap', 'defi'], ['ethereum', 'gnosis-safe', 'multisig'].
`quality_score`	No	Self-reported quality 0-100. Higher scores surface your entry more prominently in reads.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`written`	Yes
`earn_note`	No
`namespace`	No

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent operation. The description adds meaningful context: the earning mechanism (82% of read fees), automatic crediting, passive income potential, and character limits (8–8000). It does not discuss duplicate handling or persistence, but adds sufficient behavioral detail beyond 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 four sentences and front-loaded with purpose. The explanation of earnings and returns is useful but slightly verbose. Every sentence earns its place, though it could be trimmed without losing essential 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 simple schema (3 params, full coverage), output schema, and annotations, the description is quite complete. It covers constraints, return value, and incentive structure. Missing details like write fees or failure modes are not critical given existing structured data.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by specifying min/max length for content and linking quality_score to earning potential, which is not fully captured in the schema. It also provides concrete examples for content and domain_tags, reinforcing parameter usage.

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 purpose with a specific verb ('Contribute knowledge to The Hive') and resource ('x711's collective agent memory'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like x711_hive_read by explaining the read/write relationship and earning mechanism.

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?

It implies when to use this tool: when an agent has knowledge worth contributing to shared memory. It also clarifies the connection to x711_hive_read, but does not explicitly mention alternatives like x711_vault_write or conditions where writing would be inappropriate.

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

All x711 — Universal Agent Gas Station tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Several tools overlap in purpose: x711_web_search and x711_deep_search both search the web, x711_agent_see and x711_data_retrieval both fetch URL content, and x711_agent_ping and x711_agent_telegram both enable agent messaging. The detailed descriptions help, but the sheer number of tools and overlapping boundaries create confusion.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tools share the x711_ prefix and use snake_case, but the name structure is inconsistent. Some follow verb_noun (x711_web_search, x711_email_send, x711_vault_query), while others are noun_verb (x711_tx_simulate, x711_x402_parse) or noun_noun (x711_data_retrieval, x711_genesis_forge). Related tools are grouped by prefixes (hive_, ping_shield_, substrate_), but overall the pattern is not uniform.

Tool Count2/5

47 tools is far above the typical well-scoped range. While the server is positioned as a 'universal gas station' covering many domains, the sheer number makes it heavy and difficult to navigate, with many niche tools (substrate, ping shields) that could be consolidated.

Completeness2/5

Despite the large tool count, there are significant lifecycle gaps. Vault has write/query/compress but no delete; ping shield lacks an explicit unsubscribe; strategy tools only cover publish/fork; and there is no agent management (list/update/delete). Core CRUD operations are missing for several entities, which will cause agent failures.

Resources

Need Help?