Skip to main content
Glama

x402-mcp

by io.github.kwizzlesurp10-ctrl

Build seller payment requirements

x402.build_seller
Idempotent

Build seller-side x402 payment requirements for your own HTTP resource. Pass resource_url plus discovery_* fields to catalog the endpoint in Bazaar.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
priceNoList price string. Default '$0.01'. Example: '$0.05'.$0.01
pay_toNo0x recipient for USDC. Example: '0x67ff…'. Omit to use X402_PAY_TO_ADDRESS.
schemeNox402 payment scheme. Default 'exact'.exact
networkNoCAIP-2 settlement network. Default eip155:84532 (Base Sepolia). Mainnet: eip155:8453.eip155:84532
agent_idNoOptional agent identity for quota accounting.
mime_typeNoResource MIME type. Default application/json.application/json
descriptionNoHuman-readable description embedded in PAYMENT-REQUIRED.Paid MCP-backed API access
discoverableNoIf true, embed the Bazaar discovery extension. Omit to use server default.
resource_urlNoPublic URL of the paid resource. When set with discovery_* fields, Bazaar catalogs the endpoint after a settled payment.
discovery_methodNoHTTP method advertised to Bazaar. Default GET.GET
discovery_input_exampleNoOptional example input object for Bazaar. Omit if none.
discovery_output_exampleNoOptional example output object for Bazaar. Omit if none.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already communicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is carried. The description adds one meaningful behavioral side effect: including resource_url and discovery_* catalogs the endpoint in Bazaar. It doesn't cover auth impacts, state changes, or limitations, but it provides enough on top of the annotations for a basic safe invocation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences with no filler. The first states the core action; the second points out the optional discovery path. It is compact, front-loaded, and avoids repeating parameter values already in the schema.

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?

For a tool with 12 optional params, 0 required, full schema coverage, an output schema, and non-destructive/idempotent annotations, this description is largely sufficient. It gives the selection context, the core output, and the discovery-related activation pattern. The main gap is not explaining the overall flow relationship to sibling x402 tools, but that is not needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the agent already gets meaningful parameter meanings, defaults, and examples. The description adds the group-level hint that resource_url plus discovery_* fields work together for Bazaar catalogging, but it does not add detail beyond the schema. This is baseline 3 territory.

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?

The description names a specific action and target: 'Build seller-side x402 payment requirements for your own HTTP resource.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from buyer- or discovery-focused sibling tools like x402.pay_ and_fetch and x402.discover.

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?

The description clearly scopes usage to 'seller-side...for your own HTTP resource' and instructs when to include the discovery_* fields. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when NOT to use this tool, but the context and the explicit seller-side scoping are clear enough.

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

All x402-mcp 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The namespaces help, but there is real overlap in purpose: city.check with x402.pay_and_fetch, city.sample with x402.probe, and multiple tools that verify a payment and then activate, credit, or settle something. The descriptions clarify which resource is being paid for, but tool names alone leave room for misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

Nearly every tool uses a lower-case dotted namespace.action pattern, making the set easy to scan. Some command parts are inconsistent, though: x402.networks, pulse.base, and commerce.credits_requirements read as nouns rather than actions, so the style is mostly but not fully uniform.

Tool Count3/5

Nineteen tools is in the heavy range, and they span many subsystems: x402, city, commerce/quotas, swarm, ops, and Base network metrics. The number is not extreme, but the server feels like multiple product surfaces bundled under one MCP rather than a tightly scoped toolset.

Completeness4/5

The x402 lifecycle is well covered: discover, probe, pay, fetch, verify, sell, and settle, plus supportive commerce and city workflows. Notable gaps are refunds/quota-balance checks, seller resource update/removal, and invoice-like management for Stripe/card purchases, but none blocks the object workflows.

Resources