Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

x402-data-gateway

by io.github.epistemedeus
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Audit Seller Machine Buyability

seller_integrity_audit

Use this after a buyer integration fails, a seller changes a paid route, or before the next paid retry or release. Audit one exact paid GET or POST seller route against buyer-required JSON success paths. GET verifies constructible non-secret input, exact request binding, live x402 and MPP economics, and optional Bazaar eligibility; POST performs static-safe OpenAPI contract analysis and sends no target request. Use payment_offer_preflight instead when you already have one exact callable GET URL and only need its current unpaid offer before buyer authorization, or agent_discoverability_audit for catalog rank and identity. Uses no target credential, signature, or target payment and retains no seller schema, body, or query values. Payment challenge and credentials are bound to GET https://agents.samedaydesk.com/commerce/seller-integrity-audit, not mcp://. Retry the identical authorized arguments and credential.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
routeYesExact paid GET or POST path declared by the seller, without query or template parameters.
methodNoPOST receives static OpenAPI response-contract analysis without sending a target request.GET
originYesCredential-free public HTTPS seller origin on port 443.
referralNoOptional x402 receipt-derived acquisition label. It cannot change payment or delivery.
requireBazaarNoWhen true, missing Bazaar discovery metadata becomes a repair finding for live-probed GET routes.
requiredPathsNoBuyer-required dotted success-response paths that the seller schema must guarantee recursively.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / referral
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional x402 receipt-derived acquisition label. It cannot change payment or delivery.",
+  "pattern": "^r1_[0-9a-f]{64}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / route / pattern
      Previous value: -"^\\/(?!\\/)[^?#{}]+$"New value: +"^\\/[^/?#{}][^?#{}]*$"
  3. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / method
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "GET",
+  "description": "POST receives static OpenAPI response-contract analysis without sending a target request.",
+  "enum": [
+    "GET",
+    "POST"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / requireBazaar / description
      Previous value: -"When true, missing Bazaar discovery metadata becomes a repair finding."New value: +"When true, missing Bazaar discovery metadata becomes a repair finding for live-probed GET routes."
    • addedInput schema / properties / requiredPaths
      Added value: +{
+  "default": [],
+  "description": "Buyer-required dotted success-response paths that the seller schema must guarantee recursively.",
+  "items": {
+    "pattern": "^[A-Za-z0-9_-]+(?:\\.[A-Za-z0-9_-]+){0,7}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 16,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / route / description
      Previous value: -"Exact paid GET path declared by the seller, without query or template parameters."New value: +"Exact paid GET or POST path declared by the seller, without query or template parameters."
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses that no target credential/signature/payment is used, that no seller schema/body/query values are retained, that POST sends no target request, and that the payment challenge is bound to a specific HTTPS endpoint rather than mcp://. This is exactly the safety and side-effect context an agent needs for a security-sensitive audit.

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-loaded with the usage trigger and core action, then flows into mode behavior and routing alternatives. It is dense but the payment-challenge binding and retry sentence are somewhat technical filler relative to the rest, keeping it just short of a 5.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a complex, credential-adjacent audit tool with no output schema and six parameters, the description covers usage, mode differences, privacy posture, and even retry semantics. It does not describe the shape of the audit findings (beyond naming repair findings), leaving a small gap for return interpretation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds genuine meaning by explaining that GET verifies constructible input, live x402/MPP economics, and optional Bazaar eligibility while POST performs static OpenAPI analysis, which frames how method and requireBazaar interact. It stops short of enriching requiredPaths or referral beyond the schema.

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 (audit) and resource (one exact paid GET or POST seller route) and contrasts both GET and POST modes. It explicitly names two siblings it is not (payment_offer_preflight, agent_discoverability_audit), so an agent can disambiguate without opening any 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?

Gives concrete triggering conditions ('after a buyer integration fails', 'a seller changes a paid route', 'before the next paid retry or release') and names the alternative tools with the exact conditions that select them. Both when-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are covered.

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