Skip to main content
Glama

Riley Craig x402 Agent Store

by io.github.rccola990-cloud

web_search

$0.01 via x402: multi-source web & developer search in ONE call — Hacker News, GitHub, Stack Overflow and Wikipedia by keyword, returned as a unified ranked result set (titles, URLs, scores/stars, snippets). The research/search read agents make to ground answers, find code and gather context. No API keys, no per-source accounts.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesSearch query / keywords
limitNoResults per source 1-10 (default 5)
sourcesNoComma list to narrow: hackernews,github,stackoverflow,wikipedia (default all)
x_paymentNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / default
      Removed value: -5
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Added value: +"Results per source 1-10 (default 5)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / type
      Previous value: -"integer"New value: +"number"
    • addedInput schema / properties / q / description
      Added value: +"Search query / keywords"
    • addedInput schema / properties / sources
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Comma list to narrow: hackernews,github,stackoverflow,wikipedia (default all)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / x_payment
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / default
      Added value: +5
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Removed value: -"Results per source 1-10 (default 5)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / type
      Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"
    • removedInput schema / properties / q / description
      Removed value: -"Search query / keywords"
    • removedInput schema / properties / sources
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Comma list to narrow: hackernews,github,stackoverflow,wikipedia (default all)",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / x_payment
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses the cost ($0.01 via x402), the source scope, and the fact that no API keys are required. Since there are no annotations to provide read-only or side-effect information, this description offers good transparency for a search operation, though it does not mention rate limits or caching.

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?

The description is concise, using a single sentence to cover the core functionality, cost, sources, and return format. It is well-structured and free of unnecessary details.

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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description adequately specifies the return format (titles, URLs, scores/stars, snippets). It also mentions cost and no API keys. However, it does not address potential error cases or prerequisites, so it is not fully complete but sufficient for typical use.

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?

The schema gives descriptions for q, limit, and sources, but x_payment is undocumented. The description adds no information about x_payment, and only partially elaborates on limit (implied by 'results per source' in the schema) and sources (lists the allowed values). It does clarify that q is a search keyword, but overall coverage is incomplete.

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 clearly states the tool performs multi-source web search across Hacker News, GitHub, Stack Overflow, and Wikipedia, returning a unified ranked result set. This distinguishes it from other search tools in the sibling list, such as tavily_search or web_crawl.

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 explicitly mentions that this is for 'research/search read agents' to 'ground answers, find code and gather context,' indicating a typical use case. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with alternative search tools or mention when not to use it, so it is slightly below full clarity.

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

All Riley Craig x402 Agent Store 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

C2.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools occupy the same conceptual space: web_scrape vs markdown_web_scraper, post_check vs brand_ai_visibility_check, llm_chat_completions vs post_api_v1_chat_completions, chain_transaction_status vs chain_confirmations, and connect_token vs token_security_check + dex_token_data. Descriptions help in places, but for an agent facing 92 tools these near-overlapping endpoints will frequently cause misselection.

Naming Consistency2/5

Everything is snake_case, but the conventions diverge sharply: get_chain_* and chain_* coexist for the same RPC family, post_* names are HTTP-route artifacts, api_generate reverses noun_verb order, and many names are bare nouns rather than verb_noun. There is no predictable naming pattern an agent can rely on.

Tool Count1/5

At 92 tools this is far beyond the range where an agent can keep the surface coherent, even for a store. The flat tool list mixes products, bundles, aliases, proxies and single-use verticals, so most of the count is noise for any given task. A catalog/search/payment model with fewer exposed tools would fit the storefront purpose better.

Completeness3/5

The server has impressive breadth and covers key storefront/market workflows: catalog, samples, credits, directory listing, notary, and the task lifecycle. But each domain is shallow: there is no chain transaction broadcast, no task update/cancel/dispute, no AI-visibility history, and many verticals are a single tool with no follow-on operation. The surface is broad but not deeply complete.

Resources