Skip to main content
Glama

x402-data-gateway

by io.github.epistemedeus

Enrich Company Domain

enrich

Inspect a public company domain and return structured identity, technology, social, contact, DNS, email-infrastructure, and AI-readiness evidence. Use schemaforge instead for a paste-ready JSON-LD template and remediation diff, or deep_audit when both outputs are required together. Public data only; this tool makes no site changes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesPublic company domain or URL, for example stripe.com. Use enrich for company evidence; use wallet_enrich for an EVM address.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly discloses that the tool uses public data only and makes no site changes, effectively communicating a read-only safety profile. It also describes the output as structured evidence, setting expectations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three focused sentences: the first states the tool's action and output categories, the second gives precise alternatives, and the third clarifies the data scope and non-mutating nature. No filler, every sentence earns its place.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description enumerates the major output domains (identity, tech, social, contact, DNS, email-infrastructure, AI-readiness) and clearly situates the tool among siblings. This is sufficient for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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% and already provides a clear description of the 'domain' parameter with an example and a pointer to wallet_enrich. The main description reinforces the parameter but adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already conveys, meriting the baseline score.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('Inspect') and resource ('public company domain'), and enumerates the exact categories of evidence returned (identity, technology, social, contact, DNS, email-infrastructure, AI-readiness). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming schemaforge and deep_audit as alternatives.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: use schemaforge for JSON-LD templates/remediation diff, deep_audit when both outputs are needed, and the tool is scoped to public data with no site changes. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use context.

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
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several tools cluster around the same domain: there are multiple audit tools, multiple preflight tools, multiple receipt/settlement tools, and two wallet-policy-conformance tools. The descriptions are carefully distinguished with 'use X instead' notes, but an agent would still need to read closely to separate `agent_discoverability_audit` from `agent_surface_budget_audit` and `seller_integrity_audit` from `payment_offer_preflight`.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most names follow a readable, snake_case pattern with a domain prefix or action stem, such as `morpho_position`, `transaction_receipt`, `wallet_enrich`, and `contract_qualified_search`. The convention is not fully uniform—`read`, `extract`, `scan`, and `schemaforge` are standalone verbs or compounds, and `agent_surface_budget_audit` is a much longer construction—but the style is consistent enough to navigate.

Tool Count3/5

22 tools is at the heavy end of a data-gateway scope, especially since they spread across x402 discovery, Morpho lending, web domain audits, wallet policy, and blockchain receipts. Each tool explains its existence, but the set feels broader than one central data-gateway concern.

Completeness4/5

The tools form a coherent read-only x402/agent-commerce lifecycle: catalog search, discoverability, surface/seller integrity, payment offer preflight, settlement proof, and transaction receipt verification. There are some peripheral tools that do not directly serve x402, and no payment or execution action exists, but the read-only audit gate is intentionally complete and lacks dead ends.

Resources