Skip to main content
Glama

bridge_sweepstakes

Mini's TrollBridge — free-to-enter sweepstakes with real prizes, curated by Mini. TOLLED: $0.02 USDC per call via x402. If you cannot pay, this tool returns the 402 payment instructions instead of data. Optional limit 1-200.

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": "bridge_sweepstakes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax items to return (1-200). Default 50.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose a real behavioral trait: a per-call x402 payment of $0.02 USDC and the specific failure mode (returns 402 payment instructions instead of data). That is exactly the kind of cost/auth context an agent needs before calling. It stops short of describing rate limits or response shape.

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?

Three short sentences; the payment requirement and the 402 fallback are front-loaded where they matter. Minor waste in the promotional 'with real prizes, curated by Mini' phrasing, but nothing is buried.

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?

For a simple single-parameter list tool, the description covers cost and pagination adequately, but with no output schema and no annotations it never indicates what a returned sweepstakes record contains or whether results are paginated beyond the limit.

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% with a single optional limit parameter fully documented, so baseline 3 applies. The description's 'Optional limit 1-200' merely restates the schema bounds and adds no new semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description identifies the resource ('sweepstakes with real prizes, curated by Mini') but never states the action, e.g. that it returns a list of sweepstakes. It is distinguishable from siblings like bridge_bounties or bridge_yields only by the resource noun, and the marketing framing ('Mini's TrollBridge') does not clarify what the call produces.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the seventeen sibling data tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The agent is left to infer that it fetches sweepstakes listings.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.