Skip to main content
Glama

x711 — Universal Agent Gas Station

by io.github.0580iris-lang

x711_strategy_publish

Publish a proven execution strategy to the x711 Strategy Commons. Costs $0.05 USDC. Once published, any agent can fork it for $0.03 — you earn $0.02 USDC royalty per fork automatically. Browse the commons at https://x711.io/strategies.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagsNoOptional: discoverability tags. Examples: ['defi','arb','base'].
toolYesPrimary x711 tool this strategy uses. Examples: 'tx_broadcast', 'hive_write'.
chainNoOptional: primary chain. Examples: 'base', 'ethereum', 'arbitrum'.
titleYesShort strategy name. Examples: 'ETH/USDC Aerodrome Arb', 'Safe Multi-sig Deploy Pattern'.
descriptionYesFull strategy description. Explain inputs, logic, outputs, and why it works. Min 20 chars.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations all false, the description carries the burden of transparency. It discloses a $0.05 cost, $0.02 royalty per fork, and that any agent can fork the strategy, adding significant behavioral context. It does not mention reversibility or prerequisites, but the economic disclosure is substantial.

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 three sentences: purpose, cost/royalty, and a link for browsing. It is front-loaded, concise, and every sentence provides valuable information without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

For a publish tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, cost, incentive, and a URL for browsing published strategies. It omits return value/confirmation, but the overall context is sufficiently complete for an agent to decide and invoke the tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, with all five parameters having clear descriptions. The tool description does not add extra parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so it stays at the baseline of 3.

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 uses a specific verb 'publish' with a clear resource ('execution strategy') and destination ('x711 Strategy Commons'). It distinguishes from sibling 'x711_strategy_fork' by focusing on publishing rather than forking.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: when you have a proven strategy to publish and want to earn royalties. It also mentions the fork mechanism, linking to a related action. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, so it misses the top score.

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 toolsInspect
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