Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Scrapling x402 Data Store

by io.github.bnth09productions-maker
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Corporate crypto treasuries from SEC filings ($0.005)

crypto_treasuries
Read-only

PAID $0.005 USDC. Every public company crypto reserve reported in SEC XBRL filings: company, ticker, CIK, asset, units held, fair value as filed, cost basis, as-of date, SEC filing link, live USD value (on-chain Chainlink price), totals per asset. Filters ticker, asset, limit.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "crypto_treasuries"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assetNoBTC | ETH | SOL | ...
limitNo
tickerNoe.g. MSTR,TSLA
api_keyNoOptional prepaid key (sk_scrapling_...) or catalog pass token (sdp_..., from pass_day/pass_month). Otherwise pay per call with x402 via _meta['x402/payment'].

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / api_key / description
      Previous value: -"Optional prepaid key (sk_scrapling_...). Otherwise pay per call with x402 via _meta['x402/payment']."New value: +"Optional prepaid key (sk_scrapling_...) or catalog pass token (sdp_..., from pass_day/pass_month). Otherwise pay per call with x402 via _meta['x402/payment']."
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false), and the description adds real value beyond them: the payment model and cost, the data provenance (SEC XBRL filings as filed), the live-price source (on-chain Chainlink), and the claim that coverage is complete across all public companies. Deducting for no mention of what happens when no filings exist or how many rows the default limit returns.

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?

One tight paragraph: price first, then what the dataset contains, then the return fields, then the filters. No filler sentences and nothing repeated from the schema beyond a short filter recap.

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 no output schema, the description compensates well by enumerating every returned field including per-asset totals. Payment paths are documented in the schema. The only shortfall is the absence of a free-vs-paid routing hint, which matters given free_crypto_treasuries exists.

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 75% and the schema itself documents asset, ticker, and api_key formats. The description only restates the filter names ('Filters ticker, asset, limit') without clarifying semantics such as whether ticker accepts a comma-separated list or whether limit caps rows. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema does most of the work.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific resource (corporate crypto treasuries reported in SEC XBRL filings) and enumerates the exact fields returned (company, ticker, CIK, units held, fair value, cost basis, as-of date, filing link, live USD value). It's clearly distinguishable from generic price tools, but it never references the sibling free_crypto_treasuries, leaving the paid/free split unstated.

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 upfront '$0.005 USDC' price and the payment mechanics (x402 or prepaid api_key) give the agent a basis for deciding whether to call it, and the filter list implies query patterns. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no pointer to free_crypto_treasuries as the cheaper alternative for casual lookups.

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

All Scrapling x402 Data Store 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