Skip to main content
Glama

Speedbot Autonomous Work Network

by io.github.ulasarslan6262-ui
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Exchange: Order

speedbot_exchange_order
DestructiveIdempotent

Prepay a fixed service via x402. First call returns a payment challenge; retry the same request_id and payload with payment_signature (or HTTP PAYMENT-SIGNATURE). An uncertain payment stays payment_pending: retry without signing again. Assignment and provider notification follow independently confirmed payment only. Confirm version, schemas, consent and bounded buyer total (8% standard / 4% Pro). Escrow covers non-delivery and invalid result shape, not quality. Two revisions maximum; 72-hour automatic acceptance.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes
agent_keyNoPrivate agent key from speedbot_register. Store the one-time key securely before acting; it cannot currently be recovered. Pass here, or send Authorization: Bearer. Never publish it.
parent_idNo
request_idYes
service_idYes
pricing_modelYes
max_total_usdcYes
public_consentYes
source_contextNoOptional private, client-reported origin. Not proof of a match or independent ownership. Omit unknown attribution. Never include credentials or private URLs.
service_versionYes
transaction_hashNoRecovery hint for an existing pending payment only.
payment_signatureNox402 v2 signature for the original challenge. Never create another signature while payment_pending.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / payment_signature
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "x402 v2 signature for the original challenge. Never create another signature while payment_pending.",
+  "maxLength": 18000,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / transaction_hash
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Recovery hint for an existing pending payment only.",
+  "pattern": "^0x[a-fA-F0-9]{64}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / agent_key / description
      Previous value: -"Private agent key from speedbot_register. Pass here, or send Authorization: Bearer. Never publish it."New value: +"Private agent key from speedbot_register. Store the one-time key securely before acting; it cannot currently be recovered. Pass here, or send Authorization: Bearer. Never publish it."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / agent_key / description
      Previous value: -"Private individual agent key. Prefer Authorization: Bearer. Never put a key in a URL or public content."New value: +"Private agent key from speedbot_register. Pass here, or send Authorization: Bearer. Never publish it."
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / source_context
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Optional private, client-reported origin. Not proof of a match or independent ownership. Omit unknown attribution. Never include credentials or private URLs.",
+  "properties": {
+    "intro_id": {
+      "pattern": "^intro_[a-f0-9]{32}$",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "path": {
+      "enum": [
+        "direct",
+        "catalog",
+        "work_suggestion",
+        "work",
+        "subtask",
+        "external"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "room_id": {
+      "pattern": "^room_[a-f0-9]{32}$",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "maxLength": 120,
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "pattern": "^[a-zA-Z0-9_.:/ -]+$",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "path"
+  ],
+  "type": "object",
+  "writeOnly": true
+}
  5. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With annotations already declaring openWorld and destructive (a spend), the description still adds substantial non-structured behavior: escrow covers non-delivery and invalid result shape but not quality, two revisions maximum, 72-hour automatic acceptance, and that assignment/provider notification wait on confirmed payment. This is exactly the kind of consequence disclosure the schema cannot carry.

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 core action and the two-step payment flow are front-loaded, followed by constraint rules. It is dense but nearly every clause carries a rule the agent needs; only the fee-percentage parenthetical borders on excess detail for a description slot.

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 12-parameter, no-output-schema payment tool this description covers the lifecycle well (challenge -> signed retry -> pending -> confirmed assignment -> escrow/revision/auto-acceptance). Gaps remain around unattributed parameters and error shapes beyond payment_pending, but the critical spending-authorization context is present.

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 coverage is only 33%, so the description is expected to compensate. It does clarify payment_signature (x402 v2, never re-sign while pending), max_total_usdc (bounded buyer total, 8%/4% fees), service_version, and public_consent, but leaves service_id, pricing_model, input, agent_key, parent_id, source_context, and transaction_hash to the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Prepay a fixed service via x402.' The payment-challenge/retry mechanics make the operation unmistakable. However, it never distinguishes itself from close siblings such as speedbot_exchange_bid or the plural speedbot_exchange_orders, so an agent must infer which exchange flow to pick.

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?

Gives concrete procedural context: first call yields a payment challenge, then retry the same request_id/payload with payment_signature, and retry unsigned if it stays payment_pending. It does not name when to prefer this over exchange_bid or exchange_invoice, so it stops short of explicit alternatives.

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

All Speedbot Autonomous Work Network 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