Burs-IA Utils

Revisar repetición y vencimiento x402

x402-replay-check

Read-onlyIdempotent

Comprueba un pago x402 (cabecera, payload o autorización EIP-3009) frente a una hora dada y una lista de nonces ya vistos: nonce repetido, aún no válido, vencido o por vencer, y validBefore más lejos de ahora que maxTimeoutSeconds. Cuándo: un vendedor debe decidir si una autorización de pago x402 sigue vigente, con su registro de nonces aceptados. No para: decodificar una cabecera de pago x402 y revisar su estructura (x402-payment-decode); ni comparar dos recibos de entrega pagada de Burs-IA en busca de una liquidación duplicada (SKU x402 de pago aparte de Burs-IA verify-x402-replay, por llamada en USDC en Base). Efectos secundarios: ninguno (solo lectura, sin red, sin estado guardado). Determinista: la misma entrada da la misma salida. Límites: entrada JSON de hasta 64 KB, 1 s por llamada, resultado de hasta 1 MB.

EN: Checks an x402 payment (header value, payload or EIP-3009 authorization) against a given time and a supplied list of seen nonces: replayed… [EN completo / full EN: inputSchema.description]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`now`	Yes	Reference time: unix seconds (integer) or ISO 8601 date-time; no clock is read (integer or string; required; up to 40 chars).
`payment`	Yes	X-PAYMENT / PAYMENT-SIGNATURE value (base64 JSON), the decoded payload, or an authorization object {from, nonce, validAfter, validBefore} (string or object; required; up to 16448 chars).
`seen_nonces`	No	Nonces already accepted, as "0x…" or "from:0x…" (EIP-3009 nonces are unique per payer) (array of string; optional; default []).
`max_timeout_seconds`	No	The seller's maxTimeoutSeconds; a validBefore further than this from now is reported (integer; optional; min 1; max 31536000).
`min_remaining_seconds`	No	Seconds that must remain before validBefore for settlement to fit (integer; optional; default 6; min 0; max 86400).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	No
`now`	No
`from`	No
`note`	No
`nonce`	No
`errors`	No
`issues`	No
`status`	No
`warnings`	No
`valid_after`	No
`valid_before`	No
`window_seconds`	No
`seconds_remaining`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 2, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / now / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  1740672100
+]
```

Changed1 schema field changedNov 1, 2026

addedInput schema / description

Added value: +"EN: Checks an x402 payment (header value, payload or EIP-3009 authorization) against a given time and a supplied list of seen nonces: replayed nonce, not yet valid, expired or near expiry, and validBefore further from now than maxTimeoutSeconds. When: a seller has to decide if an x402 payment authorization is still fresh, from its own record of accepted nonces. Not for: decoding an x402 payment header and checking its structure (x402-payment-decode); nor comparing two Burs-IA paid-delivery receipts for a duplicate settlement (separate paid Burs-IA x402 SKU verify-x402-replay, per call in USDC on Base). Side effects: none (read-only, no network access, no stored state). Deterministic: the same input gives the same output. Limits: JSON input up to 64 KB, 1 s per call, result up to 1 MB."

First observedNov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint=false, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'sin efectos secundarios / determinista' largely restates structured data. What the description genuinely adds beyond annotations is the operational envelope: 64 KB JSON input, 1 s per call, 1 MB result cap — concrete limits an agent must plan around that no annotation conveys.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The Spanish body is front-loaded and dense: purpose, verdict list, when, not-for, side effects, limits — each sentence carries information. Minor waste from the bilingual duplication and the meta-artifact '… [EN completo / full EN: inputSchema.description]', which points at text already present rather than adding anything.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With 5 parameters, two required, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema available, the description supplies everything an agent needs before calling: accepted input shapes, the decision it answers, sibling routing, and hard size/time limits. Return-value explanation is correctly left to the output schema.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description still adds meaning by tying the checks to specific parameters — maxTimeoutSeconds is explained as the bound against which validBefore is compared, and the freshness verdict implies min_remaining_seconds. It does not restate the accepted payment encodings or nonce format, which the schema already covers well.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — checking an x402 payment (header value, payload, or EIP-3009 authorization) against a reference time and a nonce list — and enumerates the exact verdicts produced (replayed, not yet valid, expired, near expiry, validBefore beyond maxTimeoutSeconds). It also names the sibling it is not (x402-payment-decode) so an agent can discriminate without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit 'Cuándo' clause defines the decision context (a seller deciding whether an x402 authorization is still fresh, using its own accepted-nonce record), and an explicit 'No para' clause routes two alternatives: x402-payment-decode for structural decoding and verify-x402-replay for Burs-IA receipt comparison. When-to-use, when-not, and alternatives are all present.

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

All Burs-IA Utils tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?