Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

x402-data-gateway

by io.github.epistemedeus
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Audit Complete AI Search Readiness

deep_audit

Run one read-only AI-search-readiness audit for a public business domain: company, technology, contact, and DNS/email evidence from enrich, plus the live structured-data gap analysis and paste-ready JSON-LD template from schemaforge. Use enrich for company facts only or schemaforge for structured-data remediation only. The template contains placeholders for real data; the score is diagnostic, no site changes are made, and it does not guarantee AI citations. Payment challenge and credentials are bound to GET https://agents.samedaydesk.com/deep-audit, not mcp://. Retry the identical authorized arguments and credential.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNoOptional city the business serves; used only to contextualize the generated structured-data template.
domainYesPublic business domain or URL. The hostname is normalized and the audit starts at its HTTPS homepage; any supplied path or query is ignored.
verticalNoOptional structured-data template profile. med-spas is currently specialized; unsupported values fall back to it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / city
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional city the business serves; used only to contextualize the generated structured-data template.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Previous value: -"A domain or URL, e.g. stripe.com"New value: +"Public business domain or URL. The hostname is normalized and the audit starts at its HTTPS homepage; any supplied path or query is ignored."
    • addedInput schema / properties / vertical
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional structured-data template profile. med-spas is currently specialized; unsupported values fall back to it.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it declares read-only/no-site-change behavior, that the template contains placeholders rather than real data, and that the score is diagnostic only. It also discloses a non-obvious operational trait — the payment challenge and credentials are bound to a GET URL rather than mcp://, with instructions to retry identical authorized arguments. It stops short of describing failure modes (unreachable or non-public domains) or rate/limit behavior, so not quite 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?

The definition is front-loaded with the core action and the sibling routing rule, and every sentence carries information (composition, exclusions, template caveat, payment binding, retry). The first sentence is heavily loaded with a long enumeration, but nothing is padding.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description states what the audit returns (enrich-derived evidence plus gap analysis and a paste-ready JSON-LD template) and covers the unusual auth/payment and retry path. For a three-parameter composite tool, an agent has everything needed to invoke it and interpret the result.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (domain, city, vertical) are already documented with normalization, fallback, and contextualization semantics. The description adds only marginal framing (public business domain, placeholders in the template) and no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, 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?

The description names a specific verb and composite resource ('Run one read-only AI-search-readiness audit for a public business domain') and enumerates exactly what it aggregates: company/technology/contact/DNS evidence from `enrich` plus structured-data gap analysis and a JSON-LD template from `schemaforge`. It explicitly distinguishes itself from those two sibling tools, so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives an explicit alternative-selection rule: 'Use `enrich` for company facts only or `schemaforge` for structured-data remediation only,' which defines when to prefer the narrower siblings over this composite. It also clarifies the diagnostic framing ('no site changes are made', 'does not guarantee AI citations'), preventing over-expectation of the result.

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

All x402-data-gateway toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Context Every Agent Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and keep it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources