Skip to main content
Glama

post_v1_chat_completions

OPENAI-COMPATIBLE chat completions, fast tier — point any OpenAI SDK at base_url https://api.webbersites.com/v1 and pay per call in USDC instead of holding provider API keys. Models: claude-haiku-4-5 (default), gemini-2.5-flash, gemini-2.5-flash-lite, gpt-5-mini, gpt-5-nano. Caps: 16,000 input chars, 1,024 output tokens, text-only, no streaming. One flat price per call; the x402 payment IS the auth. ($0.01 per call, paid via x402)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modelNoclaude-haiku-4-5 (default), gemini-2.5-flash, gemini-2.5-flash-lite, gpt-5-mini, gpt-5-nano
messagesYesOpenAI-style messages: [{role, content}], text content only, 16,000 chars total
max_tokensNooutput cap, clamped to 1,024

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
usageNo
choicesNoOpenAI-shape choices; the answer is choices[0].message.content

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds value beyond annotations by detailing text-only, no streaming, input/output caps, and x402 payment as auth, though missing behavior on cap exceedance.

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?

Single dense paragraph, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant sentences, every line adds value.

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?

Covers input, behavior, payment, and constraints; but missing details on return format (though output schema exists) and error handling.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Description enriches schema with caps (16k chars, 1,024 tokens), default model, and text-only constraint, adding meaning beyond the schema definitions.

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 explicitly states 'OPENAI-COMPATIBLE chat completions, fast tier' and mentions the base URL and payment model, clearly distinguishing it from siblings like post_v1_pro_chat_completions.

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 specifies when to use (fast tier, pay-per-call via x402) and lists models and caps, but lacks explicit comparison to alternatives like post_v1_messages.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.