Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

textokit-mcp

by io.github.martinPisacreta
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

textokit_lead_followup_kit

Persistent lead follow-up source kit. 5 USDC per call (x402, Base); an unpaid call returns the x402 payment requirements. Free sample: textokit_sample.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "delivery": "<delivery>"
    },
    "name": "textokit_lead_followup_kit"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
deliveryYesRequest the source archive as base64 in JSON
payment_signatureNoOptional, legacy: base64 x402 v2 payment payload. Preferred: params._meta["x402/payment"]. Never a private key.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavior burden and does well on the transaction side: 5 USDC on Base via x402, and an unpaid call returns payment requirements rather than failing. It leaves unclear whether each repeated call charges again ("persistent" suggests state but not billing behavior) and what permissions/keys are needed beyond the schema's note that no private key is ever required.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler, leading with what the tool is and immediately following with price and payment consequence. Nothing needs to be moved forward.

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

Completeness3/5

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

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must carry the full burden; it covers pricing, payment failure behavior, and the free alternative, but never describes what the delivered kit consists of beyond "source-zip". For a paid tool where an agent must decide whether 5 USDC is worth spending, that content gap is material.

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 both the delivery enum and payment_signature are already documented in structured form; baseline 3 applies. The description adds nothing about the parameters themselves, though the unpaid-call sentence indirectly explains why payment_signature exists.

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 phrase "persistent lead follow-up source kit" names the resource but no verb and never says what the kit actually contains or produces; an agent must infer that this is a paid download of source files. It does differentiate itself from the free sibling by explicitly pointing at textokit_sample, which helps selection.

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?

It states the cost and the free-trial path ("Free sample: textokit_sample"), which is genuine routing guidance for a paid tool. What is missing is any when-not guidance beyond the free sample, e.g. whether repeat calls are re-charged or whether a prior paid call already covers it.

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

All textokit-mcp 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