Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

MCP x402 - Evidence-Backed Web Verification

by io.github.Diogoup26
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

General AI consultation

consultar_ia
Read-only

Use for general questions that do not require live web retrieval. Returns a concise model answer and does not fetch URLs or verify current facts. Use analisar_url for a source-bounded page report and verificar_condicoes for evidence-backed decisions. PT: Use para perguntas gerais sem pesquisa web em tempo real.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "prompt": "<prompt>"
    },
    "name": "consultar_ia"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
promptYesPergunta ou instrução, entre 1 e 4000 caracteres. Não pressupõe pesquisa web em tempo real.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
answerYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "answer": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "answer"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / prompt / description
      Previous value: -"Pergunta ou instrução para a IA"New value: +"Pergunta ou instrução, entre 1 e 4000 caracteres. Não pressupõe pesquisa web em tempo real."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false; the description reinforces this with concrete consequences — no URL fetching and no verification of current facts — which is the single most important thing an agent needs to know before trusting the answer. It does not mention response length limits or latency, so it falls just short of 5.

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 English portion is two tight, front-loaded sentences with zero waste. The trailing PT sentence is a full duplicate of the usage rule, which is defensible for bilingual routing but is still redundant text.

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?

For a one-parameter, read-only consultation tool with an output schema present, the description covers purpose, negative scope, and sibling routing. Nothing an agent needs in order to select and call it correctly is missing.

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?

With one parameter at 100% schema coverage, the schema already documents the prompt including its 1–4000 character bounds and the no-live-web caveat. The description adds only indirect guidance ('general questions'), so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states the resource (general model answer) and the scope boundary (questions that do not require live web retrieval), and explicitly names what it does not do (no URL fetching, no fact verification). It distinguishes itself from both relevant siblings by naming them.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives the selection condition ('general questions that do not require live web retrieval') plus explicit routing rules to the two alternatives: analisar_url for source-bounded page reports and verificar_condicoes for evidence-backed decisions. When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and alternatives are all present.

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

All MCP x402 - Evidence-Backed Web Verification toolsInspect
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.

Resources