Skip to main content
Glama

Secant Agent Research Pack

by io.github.jnilrac

monitor_diff

Paid x402 page diff monitor.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesHTTP URL to fetch and compare for the diff monitor.
paymentYesx402 payment proof payload containing resource, amount, wallet, and settlement metadata.
previous_hashNoOptional previous content hash to compare against the current page.
previous_textNoOptional previous page text to compare against the current page.
facilitator_idNoSettlement facilitator id. Use evm-base for Base USDC payments.evm-base
payment_identifierNoOptional idempotency key. Reuse it on retries to return the cached paid result.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

C2.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions 'Paid x402' but does not disclose key behavioral traits such as required permissions, data handling, or side effects beyond the payment aspect.

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 description is very short, which is concise but lacks sufficient detail. It is front-loaded but at the cost of completeness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Despite having 6 parameters and an output schema, the description provides minimal context. It fails to explain core functionality, return behavior, or how the payment integrates with the diff monitoring.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline expectation.

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 'Paid x402 page diff monitor' vaguely indicates it monitors page differences, but lacks a specific verb and clear resource object. It does not differentiate from siblings like extract_page or research_pack.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (codex_audit, extract_page, etc.). No context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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

All Secant Agent Research Pack toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes (audit, extraction, diff monitor, search, combined pack). The research_pack overlaps with search and extract_page but is explicitly a combined tool, so some confusion is possible but descriptions help.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern (codex_audit, extract_page, monitor_diff, research_pack, search). No mixing of styles.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, the set is well-scoped for a research pack. Each tool serves a distinct function without unnecessary bloat.

Completeness4/5

Covers key research actions: search, extraction, diff monitoring, and a Codex audit. A potential minor gap is lack of a tool for managing or storing research results, but core workflows are present.

Resources