Skip to main content
Glama

Agent402.Tools: pay-per-call web tools

by io.github.MikeyPetrillo

Request a tool Agent402 does not have

demand.request

[free] Tell Agent402 about a capability its 500+ tools do not cover (catalog size 579). Use it after catalog.search or catalog.find came back with nothing that fits, instead of giving up: requests are clustered by need, and the ones that keep coming up get built. Records demand only - it never returns a tool or runs anything. Same intake as POST https://agent402.tools/api/wish; aggregate demand is public at https://agent402.tools/api/wishes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
needYesWhat you needed and could not find, in plain language, e.g. "convert a HEIC image to JPEG" or "look up a UK company by registration number"
contextNoOptional: what you were trying to accomplish, or the input you had - helps disambiguate similar-sounding requests.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
okNo
needNo
messageNo
clusteredNo

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits beyond the annotations: it only records demand, never returns a tool, never runs anything, is free, and feeds into a public aggregate. These details are important for an agent deciding whether to call it and what to expect back. No contradiction with annotations; readOnlyHint=false is consistent with recording a request.

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 well-structured and scannable, front-loading purpose and usage. It is slightly padded with redundant details like catalog size 579 alongside '500+ tools', but the information is otherwise important and not excessive.

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 simple tool with only two parameters, the description covers everything an agent needs: when to use it, what it accomplishes, what it does not do, cost implications, and the relationship to the public API. The output schema and input schema handle the remaining details.

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?

The input schema already documents both parameters thoroughly (100% coverage), including examples for 'need' and a clear explanation for 'context'. The description does not add parameter-level detail, but it doesn't need to because the schema carries that burden. A baseline score of 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 specific action: submitting a request for a capability not covered by existing tools. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly positioning this tool as the fallback after catalog.search or catalog.find fails, and clarifies that it 'records demand only' rather than returning or executing a tool.

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?

The description gives explicit usage guidance: use this tool after catalog.search or catalog.find return nothing, instead of giving up. It also tells the agent what the tool does not do ('never returns a tool or runs anything'), which prevents misusing it as a lookup or execution tool.

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

All Agent402.Tools: pay-per-call web tools 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are grouped by clear domain prefixes (web, memory, catalog, market) and mostly have distinct behaviors. web.search and web.news overlap somewhat as both return ranked live results, and catalog.find vs catalog.search require careful reading, but the descriptions do enough to disambiguate them.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows the same dotted domain.action pattern with lowercase snake_case, e.g. web.search, memory.read, catalog.find. This is highly predictable and lets an agent infer the general behavior of an unfamiliar tool from its name alone.

Tool Count4/5

Fifteen tools is at the upper edge of the well-scoped range, but each represents a distinct capability or meta-function like payment info and catalog discovery. The count feels reasonable for a pay-per-call marketplace front-end, though a few auxiliary tools (sellers.list, demand.request) are slightly peripheral.

Completeness4/5

The flagship set covers the main workflows: web search/news/answer, rendering, transcription, market quotes, memory read/write, and catalog lookup. Some referenced tools like extract and screenshot are not included as first-class tools, but the catalog.call/search/find trio and demand.request make those gaps addressable rather than dead ends.

Resources