Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

horizon-pulse

by io.github.horizon-pulse
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Agent Readiness Payment Quote

agent_readiness_quote
Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns the payment terms for https://horizonpulse.dev/api/site/agent-readiness (base $0.05; USDC on Base only); this tool never runs the check or pays. Pay the 402 over HTTP with x402 v2: GET ?url=https://example.com (one public site). Agent-readiness report for one public site: validates llms.txt, AI-crawler robots rules, /.well-known/x402 and each sampled unpaid 402 challenge (accepts, payTo format, network/asset, header-body mirror, Bazaar extension), MCP server card and endpoint, and openapi.json 402 responses. Scored against our checklist with fixes and evidence. Read-only: 402s are never paid. Obeys robots.txt. Blocked or unreachable targets are not charged. USDC on Base only.

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": "agent_readiness_quote"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real value beyond them: price ($0.05), settlement rail (USDC on Base only), the fact that 402s are never paid, robots.txt obedience, and that blocked/unreachable targets are not charged. That is meaningful billing and side-effect disclosure. It stops short of describing the quote's return shape (payTo, amount, network) or expiry/rate limits.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The core function is front-loaded in the first clause, which is good. But the middle is a single run-on sentence enumerating every report check, and key facts are duplicated verbatim ('USDC on Base only' twice, '402s are never paid' twice), so not every sentence earns its place.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description carries the load and mostly does: price, network/asset, payment protocol, what is validated, and what is not charged. The main gap is that it never sketches the quote payload an agent should expect back, which matters because no output schema exists.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds the query syntax for the downstream HTTP call (?url=, one public site), which is useful orientation even though it is not an input to this tool.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The opening clause states a specific verb and resource ('Returns the payment terms for https://horizonpulse.dev/api/site/agent-readiness') and explicitly negates what the tool does not do ('this tool never runs the check or pays'), which prevents the agent from confusing the quote with the paid report. However, the bulk of the text describes the downstream report's contents rather than this tool's own output, and no sibling quote tool (site_audit_quote, x402_check_deep, etc.) is named for contrast.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It does explain the purchase path ('Pay the 402 over HTTP with x402 v2: GET ?url=https://example.com (one public site)'), which implies the tool is a first step to obtain terms. But it never says when to pick this quote over the many adjacent quote/check siblings, nor that the quote must precede payment. Usage is implied 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 horizon-pulse toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources