Return a curated snapshot of currently-live audit competitions and bug-bounty programs across Code4rena, Cantina, Sherlock, and direct-protocol channels. Useful for solo wardens triaging which contests to enter. Snapshot updates with each cipher-x402-mcp release; treat the data as a hint, always cross-check the platform before submitting. Free, no payment required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses update frequency (per release), data quality (hint, cross-check required), and cost (free). It does not mention read-only nature or response format, but the caveats are valuable.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, each adding value: purpose, use case, and behavioral caveats. No redundant or unnecessary phrasing.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite having no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, platforms, target users, update frequency, and a usage warning. It lacks specifics on response structure, but for a simple list tool this is sufficient.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are 0 parameters, so the description is not required to explain parameters. Baseline for no parameters is 4. The description adds context about the snapshot's content and sources, which is helpful beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description explicitly states it returns a curated snapshot of live audit competitions from specified platforms (Code4rena, Cantina, Sherlock, direct-protocol). It uses a specific verb 'Return' and clearly identifies the resource. No sibling tools compete in this domain.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides context: useful for solo wardens triaging contests. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use, but no alternatives exist among siblings, making usage clear. Exclusions are not needed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose with detailed descriptions, and there is no functional overlap between any tools, even those in similar domains like geocoding (forward vs reverse) or Solana wallet analysis (general scan vs specific protocol exposure).
Tool names follow no consistent pattern: some use verb_noun (check_drift_exposure), others use data source prefix (coinalyze_funding_rates, openfda_adverse_events), and a few use domain prefix (solana_wallet_scan). This mixture of conventions makes it hard to predict naming for similar functions.
The server claims to be for Solana & Crypto but only 6 of 15 tools are crypto-related, while the rest cover unrelated domains like medical, nutrition, and geocoding. This dilutes focus and suggests the tool count is mismatched for the stated purpose.
For a server named 'Paid Solana & Crypto Tools', the crypto toolset is incomplete, missing common operations like token swaps, DeFi protocol interactions, or NFT queries. The inclusion of many non-crypto tools does not fill these gaps.