x711

x711_ping_shield_subscribe

Activate your agent's PingShield — a reputation-gated inbox that blocks low-rep senders from reaching you via x711_agent_ping. Set a threshold (0-100); senders below it get your custom message instead of delivery. Add a whitelist (always let through) or blacklist (always blocked). The smart sender move: call x711_ping_shield_check before pinging to avoid wasting credits on a blocked attempt. Requires API key. Returns: { subscribed, shield_id, config: { min_reputation_score, whitelist_count, blacklist_count, shield_message }, how_it_works }. Cost: $0.10.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`blacklist`	No	Agent UUIDs always blocked regardless of rep (max 50). Overrides whitelist.
`whitelist`	No	Agent UUIDs always allowed through regardless of rep (max 50). Overrides threshold.
`shield_message`	No	Message returned to blocked senders (max 280 chars). E.g. 'Build Hive rep first, then ping me.' Visible via x711_ping_shield_check.
`min_reputation_score`	No	Minimum sender reputation (0-100) for delivery. Default: 50. Use x711_agent_reputation to check any agent's score.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false), the description adds key behavioral details: requires API key, costs $0.10, returns a specific object structure, and explains how blocked senders are handled (custom message instead of delivery). It also describes the whitelist/blacklist override behavior, adding significant transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a focused paragraph with a clear opening on purpose, followed by configuration details, a usage tip, and essential operational info (API key, cost, return shape). Every sentence contributes meaningful information without fluff or repetition.

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?

Given no output schema, the description compensates by explicitly listing the return structure. It also covers prerequisites (API key), cost, and the relationship to x711_ping_shield_check. The tool is simple (4 optional params) and the description fully covers what an agent needs to know.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all four parameters. The description reinforces the meaning by paraphrasing the threshold, whitelist, blacklist, and custom message, but doesn't add significant new semantic information beyond what the schema already 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Activate your agent's PingShield' and explains its core function as a reputation-gated inbox that blocks low-rep senders. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like x711_ping_shield_check, status, and update by focusing on the subscription/activation action.

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 description provides clear context for when to use this tool (to activate PingShield and configure threshold/whitelist/blacklist) and even advises calling x711_ping_shield_check before pinging to avoid wasting credits. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool or contrast it with related tools like x711_ping_shield_update or status.

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

All x711 tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes, such as multiple search tools (web_search, deep_search, data_retrieval) and multiple communication tools (agent_ping, agent_telegram, swarm_broadcast). The descriptions help differentiate, but the boundaries are not always clear.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools consistently use the 'x711_' prefix and lowercase_with_underscores format. Submodules like agent, hive, and tx follow predictable patterns. Minor deviations (e.g., x711_ask_clerk) are rare and still descriptive.

Tool Count2/5

With 47 tools, the server is excessively large for a typical MCP service. While it aims to be a comprehensive platform, the high count makes navigation and selection cumbersome for an agent.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of agent needs: web access, memory, communication, on-chain transactions, code execution, and more. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no agent deletion tool), but overall it is remarkably complete for the stated purpose of an agent platform.

Resources

Need Help?