Skip to main content
Glama

RTK Motion — Motion Capture, Biomechanics, Threat & Fleet Intelligence

by io.rtkmotion
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_trial_bvh

TRIAL — 5-second BVH skeletal sample (300 frames @ 60fps) from the Kimura side-control trial lesson. Same format as full $10 get_bvh — use to evaluate data quality before committing. Pay $0.25 USDC on Base (chain 8453, USDC 0x833589fCD6eDb6E08f4c7C32D4f71b54bdA02913) to RTK wallet 0x6C11F8a21f7ca922F483Ed21C3b6c2d9B305B10C; pass tx hash as payment_tx. Eth/Solana: /.well-known/x402.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
subjectNoSubject name: 'subject_1' (default) or 'subject_2'
x_paymentNoPreferred (x402 exact / gasless): base64 X-PAYMENT payload — a signed EIP-3009 transferWithAuthorization for this tool's USDC price to our wallet. Redeemable only by its signer; no gas needed.
payment_txNoUSDC transaction hash. Send $0.25 USDC on Base to 0x6C11F8a21f7ca922F483Ed21C3b6c2d9B305B10C, then pass tx hash here.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / x_payment
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Preferred (x402 exact / gasless): base64 X-PAYMENT payload — a signed EIP-3009 transferWithAuthorization for this tool's USDC price to our wallet. Redeemable only by its signer; no gas needed.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It thoroughly discloses payment requirements: amount ($0.25 USDC), chain (Base), wallet address, and the need to pass a transaction hash. It also mentions an alternative payment method (x402). Minor gaps exist around failure behavior or return format, but the core paid-access behavior is transparent.

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 description is dense but efficient, front-loading the core purpose and then providing necessary payment details. It avoids fluff, though some payment information is duplicated in the schema. Overall, every sentence 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?

For a paid sample tool with no output schema, the description is quite complete: it explains the sample content, duration, relationship to the full tool, and all payment instructions. The reference to 'Same format as full get_bvh' provides a pointer for return format. It could be more explicit about requiring at least one payment method, but the instructions are clear enough.

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 baseline is 3. The description largely repeats payment details already present in the schema (e.g., payment_tx description includes sending USDC and passing the hash). It does not add new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 clearly identifies the tool as a trial BVH sample ('5-second BVH skeletal sample') from a specific lesson, and explicitly differentiates it from the full version ('Same format as full $10 get_bvh'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_bvh and get_mocap_sample.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description states exactly when to use it: 'use to evaluate data quality before committing'. It also names the alternative (get_bvh) and indicates this is a cheaper trial, providing clear usage context.

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

All RTK Motion — Motion Capture, Biomechanics, Threat & Fleet Intelligence 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