Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Toll

by io.github.t0ll-xyz
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Watch a coin (webhook)

watch_coin
Idempotent

Watch one Robinhood Chain coin for your agent: Toll re-reads it about every 10 minutes, and sooner after a trade or liquidity change (with more watched coins it takes longer), and POSTs a signed JSON event to your https url when its verdict word changes, a new finding against appears (liquidity pulled, wallets dumping together), or the dev's or a launch wallet group's sold share rises 5 points or more (dev_sold, cluster_sold). The first read sends nothing. Answers the watch id and, the first time, the secret that signs every event (x-toll-signature: sha256=<hex HMAC-SHA256(secret, raw body)>). Needs a Toll key; the cap is your tier's (3 / 20 / 50 / 100 by $TOLL held). Facts, not advice.

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": {
      "address": "<address>",
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "watch_coin"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesYour webhook: a public https URL on the default port
addressYesThe token contract address to watch on Robinhood Chain: 0x followed by 40 hex characters

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: cadence (~10 minutes, degraded by more watched coins), the exact trigger conditions (verdict word change, new finding, dev_sold or cluster_sold rising 5+ points), the fact that the first read sends nothing, the auth requirement (Toll key) with tier caps, and the HMAC-SHA256 signature scheme. This is consistent with readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true (a subscription creation, not a read).

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?

Information density is high and nothing is filler, but the whole description is one long run-on sentence riddled with parentheticals, which makes the trigger conditions and the 'first read sends nothing' caveat hard to scan. Breaking the cadence, triggers, and auth into separate sentences would cost nothing.

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 no output schema, the description correctly supplies the return contract (watch id, and the one-time secret), plus auth, rate caps, cadence, and event semantics. For a webhook-registration tool this covers everything an agent needs to call it and handle the result.

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% and both parameters are documented there (https URL, 0x-prefixed 40-hex address), so the baseline is 3. The description restates the https URL requirement but adds no new syntax or constraint meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('Watch one Robinhood Chain coin') plus the mechanism ('webhook'), which is enough to separate it from siblings like check_coin, pre_buy_check, my_watches, and unwatch_coin without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description makes the monitoring intent clear ('for your agent', 'POSTs ... when its verdict word changes'), so an agent can infer this is the ongoing-subscription tool rather than a one-shot check. However, it never explicitly names an alternative (check_coin, pre_buy_check) or states when NOT to use it, leaving the routing decision to inference.

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

All Toll 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