Skip to main content
Glama

Bounty Engineer Agent Commerce

by io.github.gatoprd
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Quote one autonomous purchase

quote_autonomous_purchase
Read-onlyIdempotent

Given an agent goal and hard USD budget, return a buyer-controlled value ladder: cheapest relevant proof, recommended value, optional higher-outcome upgrade, and executable purchase plan. This tool itself is free and never spends funds. Example: {goal:'extract a public webpage',max_price_usd:0.01,preferred_rail:'x402'}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalYesPlain-language goal. Example: extract a public webpage
max_price_usdNoHard total USD price ceiling; never exceeded. Example: 0.01
preferred_railNoPreferred payment rail. Base USDC is the preferred direct wallet fallback.x402

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / preferred_rail / description
      Previous value: -"Preferred payment rail. Example: x402"New value: +"Preferred payment rail. Base USDC is the preferred direct wallet fallback."
    • changedInput schema / properties / preferred_rail / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "x402",
-  "direct_solana_usdc",
-  "direct_solana_sol",
-  "direct_bitcoin",
-  "paypal_prepaid"
-]New value: +[
+  "x402",
+  "direct_base_usdc",
+  "direct_solana_usdc",
+  "direct_solana_sol",
+  "direct_bitcoin",
+  "paypal_prepaid"
+]
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / goal / description
      Added value: +"Plain-language goal. Example: extract a public webpage"
    • addedInput schema / properties / max_price_usd / description
      Added value: +"Hard total USD price ceiling; never exceeded. Example: 0.01"
    • addedInput schema / properties / preferred_rail / description
      Added value: +"Preferred payment rail. Example: x402"
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds the crucial cost disclosure that the call is free and never spends funds — meaningful context for a purchase-adjacent tool. It does not mention rate limits, auth requirements, or freshness/staleness of the quote.

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-loads the return contract in the first sentence, then the free/no-spend guarantee, then an example. The example largely duplicates the schema's own examples, which is mild redundancy, but nothing is padded beyond that.

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?

With no output schema, the description does enumerate the returned ladder components, so an agent knows the shape of the response and that a plan is executable downstream. It omits output format specifics and what happens when no product fits the budget, leaving a small gap for a tool whose output is its main value.

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 per-parameter descriptions and examples already present, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description's inline example mirrors the same three fields without adding new semantics (e.g., how max_price_usd interacts with rail fees), so 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?

States a concrete verb and artifact ('return a buyer-controlled value ladder: cheapest relevant proof, recommended value, optional upgrade, and executable purchase plan'), which is unmistakably a quoting/planning operation. The explicit 'This tool itself is free and never spends funds' separates it from execute_paid_product and the firewall/payment siblings.

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?

Clearly frames the input context (given an agent goal and hard USD budget) and implies this is the pre-purchase quoting step by stressing that no funds are spent. It stops short of explicitly naming when not to use it or pointing to execute_paid_product as the follow-up action, so routing is inferred rather than stated.

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

All Bounty Engineer Agent Commerce 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