Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

akari-x402

by io.github.edvyno
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

akari_wallet_verdict

THE DECISION for a wallet, in one paid call — should you settle an invoice to this address? Returns a 0-100 risk score, a PAY / CAUTION / AVOID verdict, the exact evidence that moved the score (buying power, transaction history, contract status, recent payer pattern), and the next action to take. Built for agents that pay other agents: x402 seller vetting, prepay-or-not calls, invoice risk caps, airdrop allowlist screening. Underlying facts are included so the caller can re-d

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": "akari_wallet_verdict"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the load well: it discloses that the call is paid, that the response is a composite score plus verdict plus the exact driving evidence, and that underlying facts are returned. It doesn't mention latency, rate limits, failure modes, or whether the underlying data is immutable/cached, and the final sentence is cut off.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: the decision framing, return payload, and use cases arrive in that order with little filler. It is on the long side and ends mid-word ('re-d'), which costs it a point.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Outputs are described thoroughly enough to substitute for the missing output schema, which is good given zero annotations. However, the input mechanism for the wallet address is never explained and the text is truncated, leaving a genuine gap an agent must guess around.

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?

Zero parameters normally earns the baseline 4, but the description frames the tool around 'this address' and 'a wallet' without explaining how the caller supplies that target given an empty input schema. That implied-but-absent input is a real ambiguity rather than added parameter meaning.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: produce a settle-or-not decision for a wallet address, returning a 0-100 score, PAY/CAUTION/AVOID verdict, evidence and next action. It is distinguishable from a raw-data sibling like akari_wallet_intel, but it doesn't name that sibling or explicitly contrast itself with it.

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?

Enumerates concrete situations (x402 seller vetting, prepay-or-not calls, invoice risk caps, airdrop allowlist screening) and states the audience ('agents that pay other agents'), which gives a clear picture of when to reach for it. It stops short of naming when NOT to use it or which sibling to use for raw transaction data instead.

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

All akari-x402 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