Skip to main content
Glama

xrpl-referee

by io.github.eamwhite1
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Fee Schedule

get_fees
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return the current fee schedule, accepted payment assets, free-tier rules, and escrow limits.

Call this before calling any paid endpoint. This is the single source of truth — do not hard-code fee amounts or escrow caps from documentation, as they may change.

Pass wallet_address to see how many free escrows remain for that wallet.

Returns:

  • audit_fee: USD amount, accepted assets (XRP/RLUSD on XRPL, USDC on Base), destination addresses, current XRP amount at live price, fee_hash field name and format

  • free_tier: free escrow count, eligibility rules, free_escrows_remaining (if wallet_address passed)

  • escrow_limits: default cap ($3,000 USD), KYC cap ($10,000 USD), Travel Rule warn threshold

  • free_endpoints: endpoints that never require payment

  • paid_endpoints: endpoints that require a fee_hash or X-PAYMENT header

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
wallet_addressNoOptional XRPL wallet address (r...) to check free_escrows_remaining for that wallet.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / wallet_address
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Optional XRPL wallet address (r...) to check free_escrows_remaining for that wallet."
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the fee schedule is volatile ('may change'), it is the authoritative source to consult before payment, and passing wallet_address changes the returned payload. It omits auth needs and rate limits, so not a 5.

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?

Front-loads purpose, then usage, then a structured Returns list with zero filler. The Returns breakdown is useful but partially redundant since an output schema exists, which keeps it from a perfect score.

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 payment-gating tool, the description covers the key facts an agent needs: when to call it, that values are dynamic, the optional wallet_address effect, and a summary of the returned fields. Combined with the output schema and annotations, nothing critical is missing.

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 100% and the single parameter's description already explains that wallet_address checks free_escrows_remaining. The description restates this effect ('Pass wallet_address to see how many free escrows remain') with no additional syntax or format detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Return) plus the resource (fee schedule) and enumerates what it contains: audit fee, accepted assets, free-tier rules, escrow limits. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like get_xrp_price or get_rlusd_quote, which return prices rather than the fee/payment policy.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly states when to call it — 'Call this before calling any paid endpoint' — and warns against hard-coding amounts. However, it does not name when-not to use it or point to any alternative tool for fee-related questions, so it falls just short of the 5 bar.

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

All xrpl-referee 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