preflight402
Server Details
Trust verdict for an x402 payment endpoint: health, 402 handshake, price, proceed/caution/avoid.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- duskwire/preflight402
- GitHub Stars
- 0
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.4/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
With only a single tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap. The tool's purpose is clearly defined.
The tool name 'preflight' is descriptive and follows a clear convention. With only one tool, consistency is inherently maintained.
A single tool for a focused preflight check is reasonable, but the server's scope is narrow. Additional tools for paid-tier or batch operations could enhance the offering.
The tool thoroughly covers the preflight check functionality, including multiple protocols and trust recommendations. However, it lacks other potential operations like re-checking or historical analysis, which are minor gaps.
Available Tools
1 toolpreflightx402 Preflight Trust CheckAInspect
One free call before your agent pays.
Probes the URL (no wallet, payment, or auth) and returns a trust-preview.v1 verdict: liveness and latency, TLS validity, the 402 payment handshake with protocol detection (x402 v1/v2, MPP-capable), detected networks/asset/price with a USD estimate, ERC-8004 identity binding with Sybil-filtered reputation for the payee (which can adjust the recommendation), and a proceed / caution / avoid recommendation with human-readable reasons. Paid-tier fields (uptime history, reseller analysis) are present but null on the free tier.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Absolute https URL of the x402 or MPP payment endpoint to check |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description explains the tool is free and non-intrusive (no wallet, payment, or auth). It lists exactly what is returned and notes that paid-tier fields are null. It doesn't mention side effects or rate limits, but the context suggests a safe read operation. With no annotations, the description carries the burden well.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise, front-loaded with the key benefit ('One free call'), and then details the output. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for the list), but it is clear and to the point.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has an output schema (not shown), the description doesn't need to detail return values. It comprehensively covers the purpose, input, and what to expect, including free vs paid tiers. It is complete for the tool's complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The single parameter 'url' has a schema description that is already clear. The tool description adds context by explaining that the URL is probed and what the check entails, enhancing understanding beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: a free preflight check that probes a URL and returns a trust-preview verdict. It uses specific verbs like 'probes' and 'returns' and details the output fields.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly says 'One free call before your agent pays,' implying it's for pre-payment evaluation. It also clarifies that no wallet/payment/auth is required. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though no siblings exist.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!