Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

YRUZ x402 tools

by io.github.xzntexe
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

YRUZ RealityGraph Compare (0.015 USDC)

reality_compare
Read-onlyIdempotent

Two entities side by side: for every core property the current values of each and whether they are the same, overlap, differ or exist on one side only; shared identifiers (a sign of a duplicate record); and properties neither side states (unsupported comparisons). Accepts ids or names. Price: 0.015 USDC per call, paid with x402 (USDC on Base or Solana, no account, no API key); invalid input is refused before payment and a failed run is never charged. Without a payment the tool returns the x402 PaymentRequired. How to call it: get_example {"tool":"reality_compare"}. Same tool over HTTP: https://yruz.one/api/reality/compare?a=Q312&b=Q2283

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": {
      "a": "<a>",
      "b": "<b>"
    },
    "name": "reality_compare"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aYesfirst entity: Wikidata id or name (required)
bYessecond entity: Wikidata id or name (required)
langNolanguage of labels, 2-3 letters (default en)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / a / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "Q312"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / b / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "Q2283"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent/safe profile, but the description adds substantive behavior beyond them: exact price, x402 payment requirement, no account/API key, invalid input refused before payment, failed runs never charged, and a PaymentRequired response without payment. What's missing is anything about response size, latency, or rate limits on paid calls.

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 output payload description is front-loaded and every sentence carries information (payment terms, error behavior, example lookup, HTTP mirror). It is dense and slightly fragmented, but not padded — the only borderline element is the raw HTTP URL, which is marginal for an MCP caller.

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?

With only three simple params, full annotations, and no output schema, the description covers what is returned, payment mechanics, and failure modes, which is sufficient to call it correctly. It could be a touch more complete by clarifying lang handling and whether comparisons are Wikidata-scoped.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds only 'accepts ids or names', which the schema already states for a and b, and it says nothing at all about the lang parameter that is present in 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?

The description makes clear this is a pairwise comparison of two entities, enumerating what is returned (shared properties and their match state, shared identifiers, one-sided properties). It is distinct from single-entity siblings like reality_get_entity or reality_resolve_entity, though it never names those siblings explicitly, so it stops short of the top band.

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?

Usage is implied: it accepts ids or names and points at get_example for call syntax. But there is no explicit 'use this instead of reality_get_entity when...' routing and no statement of when a comparison is appropriate versus searching or resolving first — the reader must infer it.

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

All YRUZ x402 tools 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