Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

YRUZ x402 tools

by io.github.xzntexe
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

YRUZ TenderGraph Supplier History (0.015 USDC)

tenders_get_supplier_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

Award history of a supplier from TED result notices that name it as a winner: total award notices, a dated timeline of the most recent awards with buyer, country, CPV and values as published, buyers and countries served, CPV divisions, values per currency and name variants. Only explicit award results count; no reputation or risk judgement is made. 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":"tenders_get_supplier_history"}. Same tool over HTTP: https://yruz.one/api/tenders/supplier?name=Siemens&country=PL

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "tenders_get_supplier_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fromNopublished from YYYY-MM-DD
langNolanguage, 2 letters (default en)
nameYessupplier name or part of it (required), e.g. Siemens
countryNobuyer country, ISO code

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / country / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "PL"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "Siemens"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the paid-access mechanics: 0.015 USDC per call via x402 (USDC on Base or Solana, no account/API key), invalid input refused before payment, failed runs never charged, and an explicit x402 PaymentRequired response when unpaid. It also scopes the semantics ('no reputation or risk judgement is made'), which prevents the agent from over-reading results.

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?

Front-loads what the tool returns before the payment and invocation details, and every clause carries information (scope caveat, price, failure policy, example). It is a single dense block with minor promotional framing ('Same tool over HTTP', the get_example self-reference) that could be trimmed, but nothing is wasted.

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 compensates by enumerating the returned data fields. For a paid, open-world read tool it covers scope limits, cost, error/refusal behavior, and gives both a canonical invocation example and the HTTP equivalent — everything an agent needs to call it correctly.

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%, so the schema already documents name, country, from and lang. The description adds little parameter-specific detail beyond the example HTTP URL hinting that name is a supplier and country is the buyer country — information already present in the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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+resource combination ('Award history of a supplier from TED result notices that name it as a winner') and enumerates the exact outputs (award notices, dated timeline, buyers, countries, CPV divisions, values per currency, name variants). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like tenders_get_awards (awards-centric) or tenders_get_history (notice history).

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?

The qualifier 'from TED result notices that name it as a winner' plus 'Only explicit award results count' establishes when this tool returns data and implicitly when it returns nothing useful. However, it never explicitly contrasts with the sibling tenders_get_awards or tenders_search, leaving the agent to infer which sibling to pick for an awards lookup versus a supplier-centric lookup.

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