Agent Margin Router

Web Search

web_search

Read-only

Live web search results (title, URL, domain, snippet) for any query, key-less, region-aware. Pay per call with USDC or USDT on Base via x402. 3 free calls per wallet.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	Yes	Search query (1-400 chars).
`region`	No	Region code, e.g. wt-wt, de-de, us-en.
`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.
`max_results`	No	1-20, default 10.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes
`token`	No	Token actually used for payment (USDC, USDT or FREE).	USDC
`region`	Yes
`source`	Yes
`results`	Yes
`routing`	Yes	How the request was routed (provider, fallback, cache, latency).
`cost_usdc`	Yes	Price charged in stablecoin units (USDC/USDT 1:1); 0 on the free tier.
`fetched_at`	No	UTC timestamp when the data was fetched.
`result_count`	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 /web-search``.",
+  "properties": {
+    "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"
+    },
+    "query": {
+      "title": "Query",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "region": {
+      "title": "Region",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "result_count": {
+      "title": "Result Count",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "results": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "title": "Results",
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "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",
+    "query",
+    "region",
+    "results",
+    "result_count",
+    "source"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 13, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / max_results / default
```
Added value: +10
```
- addedInput schema / properties / max_results / maximum
```
Added value: +20
```
- addedInput schema / properties / max_results / minimum
```
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

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description appropriately focuses on runtime context: key-less access, pay-per-call via USDC/USDT on Base through x402, and a 3-free-calls-per-wallet allowance. It does not cover rate limits or failure behavior beyond the free tier, but it adds meaningful cost and access transparency beyond the 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?

The description is compact and well-structured: the first sentence front-loads purpose and result fields, and the second covers payment and free tier. Every clause carries useful information without redundancy.

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?

With an output schema, readOnly/openWorld annotations, and full parameter schema coverage, the description only needed to supply runtime and billing context, which it does. Missing details like region defaults and max_results are already covered by schema defaults, so the description is complete enough 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all six parameters and their constraints. The description's 'key-less' and 'region-aware' phrases lightly reinforce wallet and region semantics but add no meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 opens with 'Live web search results (title, URL, domain, snippet) for any query', naming a concrete verb, resource, and expected result fields. This clearly distinguishes it from specialized siblings like arxiv_search, news_search, and reddit_search by signaling a general web search scope.

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?

The phrase 'for any query' implies a general-purpose web search context, but the description never explicitly states when to choose this over a specialized sibling or when to avoid it. No alternative tools are named, so an agent must infer routing from the 'web' label and the sibling names.

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.