Agent Margin Router

Currency Convert

currency_convert

Read-only

Fiat currency conversion with ECB reference rates (30+ currencies): amount, source currency, one or many targets. Returns rates, converted amounts and rate date. Pay per call with USDC or USDT on Base via x402. 3 free calls per wallet.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	Yes	Target currencies, e.g. ["USD", "GBP"].
`from`	Yes	ISO-4217 source currency, e.g. EUR.
`amount`	No	Amount in source currency (default 1).
`wallet`	No	Your EVM wallet address (0x...). Unlocks the free tier (3 free calls per wallet).
`api_key`	No	Optional AMR enterprise API key.
`x_payment`	No	Optional signed x402 payment payload (base64 JSON) for USDC/USDT on Base.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rates`	Yes
`token`	No	Token actually used for payment (USDC, USDT or FREE).	USDC
`amount`	Yes
`source`	Yes
`routing`	Yes	How the request was routed (provider, fallback, cache, latency).
`converted`	Yes
`cost_usdc`	Yes	Price charged in stablecoin units (USDC/USDT 1:1); 0 on the free tier.
`rate_date`	No
`fetched_at`	No	UTC timestamp when the data was fetched.
`from_currency`	Yes
`freshness_seconds`	Yes	Age of the underlying data in seconds (0 = fetched live).
`x_payment_response`	No	Base64-encoded x402 settlement receipt (mirrors the X-PAYMENT-RESPONSE header). Only present when the call was paid with `x_payment`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 15, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "Response for ``POST /currency-convert``.",
+  "properties": {
+    "amount": {
+      "title": "Amount",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "converted": {
+      "additionalProperties": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "title": "Converted",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "cost_usdc": {
+      "description": "Price charged in stablecoin units (USDC/USDT 1:1); 0 on the free tier.",
+      "title": "Cost Usdc",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "fetched_at": {
+      "description": "UTC timestamp when the data was fetched.",
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "title": "Fetched At",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "freshness_seconds": {
+      "description": "Age of the underlying data in seconds (0 = fetched live).",
+      "title": "Freshness Seconds",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "from_currency": {
+      "title": "From Currency",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "rate_date": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Rate Date"
+    },
+    "rates": {
+      "additionalProperties": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "title": "Rates",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "routing": {
+      "description": "How the request was routed (provider, fallback, cache, latency).",
+      "properties": {
+        "cache_hit": {
+          "default": false,
+          "description": "True if the result was served from cache.",
+          "title": "Cache Hit",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "fallback_used": {
+          "default": false,
+          "description": "True if the primary provider failed and a fallback served the result.",
+          "title": "Fallback Used",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "latency_ms": {
+          "default": 0,
+          "description": "End-to-end routing latency in milliseconds.",
+          "title": "Latency Ms",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "provider": {
+          "description": "Name of the upstream provider that served the result.",
+          "title": "Provider",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "providers_tried": {
+          "description": "Providers attempted, in order.",
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": "Providers Tried",
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "provider"
+      ],
+      "title": "RoutingMeta",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "title": "Source",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "token": {
+      "default": "USDC",
+      "description": "Token actually used for payment (USDC, USDT or FREE).",
+      "title": "Token",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "x_payment_response": {
+      "description": "Base64-encoded x402 settlement receipt (mirrors the X-PAYMENT-RESPONSE header). Only present when the call was paid with `x_payment`.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "freshness_seconds",
+    "cost_usdc",
+    "routing",
+    "amount",
+    "from_currency",
+    "rates",
+    "converted",
+    "source"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 13, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / amount / default
```
Added value: +1
```

changedInput schema / properties / wallet / description

Previous value: -"Your EVM wallet address (0x...). Unlocks the free tier (3 calls per wallet)."New value: +"Your EVM wallet address (0x...). Unlocks the free tier (3 free calls per wallet)."

AddedSep 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, which align with a read-only, dynamic-rate tool. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: ECB reference rates, payment requirement, free tier, and rate date. It doesn't contradict 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 sentences pack the core function and payment model efficiently, with the core conversion action front-loaded. No filler or repetition.

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?

The tool has an output schema (present but not shown) and a moderate number of parameters. The description covers the essential payment requirement and rate source. It doesn't mention update frequency or rate limits beyond the free tier, but these are not critical for invocation.

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%, so all parameters are already documented. The description reinforces the meaning of amount, source, and targets but adds no extra syntax or format details beyond the schema. 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 clearly states the tool converts fiat currencies using ECB reference rates, supports multiple target currencies, and returns rates and converted amounts. It distinguishes itself from crypto-focused siblings like token_price and dex_price by specifying fiat conversion.

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 indicates fiat conversion and mentions the payment model (pay per call, 3 free calls per wallet). While it doesn't explicitly say when not to use it vs alternatives, the fiat focus and sibling list make the context clear.

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

All Agent Margin Router 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.