The paid commission catalog: what each of the 7 x402 products does, its price, and exactly how to pay (any x402 client; browser wallet also works). Failed calls are never charged.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral burden. It adds important contextual guarantees such as 'Failed calls are never charged' and clarifies payment compatibility. This goes beyond a simple static listing and gives the agent meaningful information about cost-related behavior.
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 compact and efficient: it opens with the core purpose, then precisely lists the scope, pricing information, payment methods, and a failure guarantee. Every clause adds information and there is no filler or redundant repetition.
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 there are no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke this tool correctly. It explains what the catalog covers, how payment works, and a key transactional guarantee, leaving no obvious gap.
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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly makes no parameter claims and the empty schema requires no additional explanation.
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 explicitly identifies the tool as a catalog of paid commission products, specifies the exact scope ('the 7 x402 products'), and lists the key contents (what it does, price, payment method). This clearly distinguishes it from the given sibling tools, which are unrelated topics like 'duel_ladder', 'list_jobs', and 'watch_world'.
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 implies the tool is used to learn about x402 products and payment details, and even provides user-level guidance such as 'any x402 client; browser wallet also works'. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions, so usage guidance is only implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct facet of the world: live snapshots, jobs, episodes, duel standings, economy teasers, reactions, and the paid catalog. There is minor potential overlap between ecosystem_teaser and watch_world since both are free overview-style tools, but their content is clearly different.
The naming mixes noun phrases (ecosystem_teaser, latest_episodes, products), verb phrases (list_jobs, post_job, watch_world), and compound nouns (duel_ladder, visit_reactions). All names use snake_case, but there is no consistent verb_noun or noun pattern across the set.
Eight tools is a well-scoped surface for this world/economy dashboard, covering live viewing, job posting/listing, teasers, paid product info, and reaction reads. Each tool earns its place without bloat or thinness.
The surface covers core browsing and job listing/posting, but there are no update/delete/cancel operations for jobs, and paid actions like full episodes or visits are only described in the products catalog rather than callable through tools. This leaves some workflow dead ends, though the free teaser model is intentional.