xrpl_escrow_monitor
XRPL escrow intelligence: locked XRP amounts, conditions, expiry, total value
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes |
xrploracle
TDQS
D1.7/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, and the description provides no behavioral details—no mention of read-only nature, API calls, potential side effects, or data sources. It's merely a headline.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness2/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a 7-word fragment, not a proper sentence. It's concise but under-specifies the tool's purpose and behavior.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description still leaves the tool's operation and return value entirely unclear. It doesn't convey enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema defines a single 'address' parameter, but the description doesn't mention it or explain what address should be provided. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but offers no parameter semantics.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose2/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses the noun phrase 'escrow intelligence' rather than an action verb. It lists output data points but doesn't state what the tool does (e.g., 'retrieve' or 'monitor'). Among siblings (xrpl_escrow_check, xrpl_escrow_create), it doesn't differentiate.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It doesn't mention any context, prerequisites, or when to use it over xrpl_escrow_check or other tools.
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.
TDQS
C2.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5
Several tools have overlapping purposes, particularly the escrow check/monitor pair and the many RLUSD tools covering supply, integrity, holders, and compliance. Account-related tools like account_intel, gateway_balances, and token_check also share boundaries. An agent would need careful reading to choose correctly.
Naming Consistency4/5
All tools share the xrpl_ prefix and use snake_case consistently. However, the second part mixes nouns and verbs (e.g., overview, iso20022, path_find, quantum_join), so the pattern is not strictly verb_noun. This is still readable and predictable.
Tool Count2/5
31 tools is on the heavy side for an oracle server, especially with 9 RLUSD-specific tools that could be consolidated. The breadth of XRPL topics is large, but the count feels inflated beyond what an agent needs.
Completeness4/5
The tool set covers the major XRPL domains: accounts, DEX, AMM, NFTs, escrow, payments, compliance, and RLUSD. There are no glaring dead ends for an oracle use case. Some areas like transaction history are missing, but they fall outside the intelligence scope.