Anyway Possible Paid Agent Utilities

x402 Merchant Snapshot ($0.05 USDC)

merchant_snapshot

Read-only

Score an x402 merchant's discovery, reliability, buyer signals, and observed Base USDC activity, then identify the largest revenue issue.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`payTo`	Yes	Merchant payment-recipient wallet address on Base.
`queries`	Yes	One to three buyer search phrases used to evaluate marketplace visibility.
`excludePayers`	No	Optional wallet addresses to exclude from external-buyer activity signals, such as self-test wallets.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`grade`	Yes
`score`	Yes
`network`	Yes
`signals`	Yes
`upgrade`	Yes
`merchant`	Yes
`observedAt`	Yes
`snapshotId`	Yes
`visibility`	Yes
`limitations`	Yes
`biggestIssue`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedSep 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / excludePayers / description

Added value: +"Optional wallet addresses to exclude from external-buyer activity signals, such as self-test wallets."

removedInput schema / properties / excludePayers / items / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/properties/payTo"
```
addedInput schema / properties / excludePayers / items / pattern
```
Added value: +"^0x[a-fA-F0-9]{40}$"
```
addedInput schema / properties / excludePayers / items / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

addedInput schema / properties / payTo / description

Added value: +"Merchant payment-recipient wallet address on Base."

addedInput schema / properties / queries / description

Added value: +"One to three buyer search phrases used to evaluate marketplace visibility."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "biggestIssue": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "grade": {
+      "enum": [
+        "A",
+        "B",
+        "C",
+        "D",
+        "F"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "limitations": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "merchant": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "network": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "observedAt": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "score": {
+      "maximum": 100,
+      "minimum": 0,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "signals": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "snapshotId": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "upgrade": {
+      "$ref": "#/properties/signals"
+    },
+    "visibility": {
+      "items": {
+        "$ref": "#/properties/signals"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "snapshotId",
+    "merchant",
+    "network",
+    "observedAt",
+    "score",
+    "grade",
+    "signals",
+    "visibility",
+    "biggestIssue",
+    "upgrade",
+    "limitations"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds context about the evaluation dimensions and output, but does not mention the $0.05 USDC cost (present in the title but not the description) or any computational/API side effects. It does not contradict annotations, so a 3 is acceptable given the low bar set by existing 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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and outcome. It is concise with zero fluff, efficiently conveying the tool's scope and purpose.

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?

Given an output schema exists (so return value details are covered), the description captures the essential scope: what is evaluated and what the tool produces. It omits the transactional cost (present in the title) but otherwise covers necessary context for calling the tool. Complexity is moderate, and the description is complete enough for an agent to know what to expect.

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 all parameters (payTo, queries, excludePayers) are already well-documented in the schema. The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining how queries are used or the role of exclusion. This falls at the baseline 3, where the schema carries the burden.

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's purpose: scoring an x402 merchant across discovery, reliability, buyer signals, and Base USDC activity, then identifying the largest revenue issue. It uses specific verbs and a clear resource, and differentiates from siblings like merchant_audit and base_balance by focusing on a revenue-issue diagnosis.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies a quick 'snapshot' but does not mention when to prefer merchant_audit or other siblings. Without stated exclusions or conditions, the agent must infer usage from the name and sole sentence.

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

All Anyway Possible Paid Agent Utilities 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.