Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Scrapling x402 Data Store

by io.github.bnth09productions-maker
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Research hypothesis snapshot NOT a call ($0.03)

odds_hypothesis
Read-only

PAID $0.03. Research card with market-implied probability + FNG. NOT a buy/sell recommendation; not personalized advice.

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": {
      "q": "<q>"
    },
    "name": "odds_hypothesis"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYes
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. Added

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false), so the remaining burden is low. The description does add genuinely useful behavior beyond annotations: the $0.03 charge is front-loaded, and the no-advice/no-personalization framing sets expectations for the returned content. It does not describe what the card contains structurally or how billing interacts with the api_key parameter.

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?

Three short fragments, with the cost notice front-loaded — nothing is padded or redundant. The telegraphic 'FNG' abbreviation and the elliptical 'Research card with...' phrasing cost a little clarity, but the size is well matched to the content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and an undescribed required parameter, the description carries most of the explanatory load and does not meet it. An agent knows the price and the disclaimer but not what to put in 'q' or what the returned card looks like, which is a material gap for a paid call.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 50%: api_key is documented in the schema, but the required 'q' parameter has no description at all. The tool description never mentions 'q' or explains what form a hypothesis/question should take, so it fails to compensate for the gap on the one parameter an agent must supply.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description identifies the output artifact (a 'research card') and two ingredients (market-implied probability, FNG), which is more specific than the bare name. But it never states what the tool operates on or what the required 'q' input represents (a hypothesis? a market question?), and the title's 'Research hypothesis snapshot NOT a call' is the only hint. It does not differentiate from siblings like odds_pulse, odds_history, or free_odds_sample.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no alternative named. The only usage-adjacent content is a negative disclaimer ('NOT a buy/sell recommendation; not personalized advice'), which tells the agent what the output is not, not when to select this tool over a free or cheaper sibling.

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