Agent Auto-Pilot status: the node-operated keeper agent that pays other agents automatically per call (x402), its schedule, daily spend against the cap and recent settlements.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must stand alone. It describes the content but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or without side effects, though 'status' suggests it. It also doesn't mention any error conditions or limitations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, compact sentence that front-loads the main subject and then lists the key data points it provides. No redundant words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns (schedule, daily spend, settlements). It lacks explicit notes on error handling or data format, but for a simple status query it is sufficient.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has no parameters, so the description adds no parameter-specific information. The schema is empty and fully documented, satisfying the baseline for zero-parameter tools.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly identifies the tool as providing status information about the Autopilot keeper agent, detailing what it covers (schedule, daily spend, settlements). It distinguishes from sibling tools which focus on other aspects like chain info or transactions.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for checking autopilot status but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
aman_list_services and aman_service_catalog both describe the same x402 service marketplace with overlapping fields, and aman_market overlaps heavily with aman_price. The detailed descriptions help separate them, but an agent could easily select the wrong tool for the same task.
All tools share the aman_ prefix and use lowercase with underscores, but the pattern is mixed: noun phrases like aman_market, aman_price, and aman_chain_info sit alongside verb_noun tools like aman_get_tx, aman_list_services, and aman_invoke_service. It is readable but not a single consistent convention.
11 tools is well within the typical 3-15 range and the set spans chain info, transactions, tokens, market data, and agent services. However, a couple of near-duplicate tools such as list_services/service_catalog and market/price make the count feel slightly padded.
The core domain is well covered: chain status, transaction lookup, token details, market snapshots, service discovery, and paid agent invocation are all present. Minor gaps like account balance lookups or block-by-height queries are not blockers for the apparent read-only/explorer purpose.