OMENZ agent tools

authorize

OMENZ Authorize: the authorization step for agent payments. One call before paying any x402 endpoint: live quote + preflight (up, price within max, network, stablecoin, expected payTo), payee check (known x402 seller?), fair-price check vs comparable endpoints, the owner's spend policy and Permission Passport if sent -> APPROVE / REVIEW / DECLINE with reasons and a signed 5-minute authorization code anyone can verify. Never pays the target. By OMENZ. (MCP calls run in AYNE, the free playzone; production: POST https://www.omenz.org/api/tollbooth/v1/authorize, $0.001 via x402.)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "authorize"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes
`spend`	No
`method`	No
`policy`	No
`max_price_usd`	No
`passport_token`	No
`expected_pay_to`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses that it 'Never pays the target' (no funds move), the possible verdicts (APPROVE / REVIEW / DECLINE with reasons), the returned artifact (a signed 5-minute authorization code anyone can verify), the expiry window, and the production endpoint plus $0.001 x402 cost. This is well beyond what a bare schema would convey.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, verdicts, and the critical 'never pays' guarantee before the operational parenthetical. The billing/AYNE parenthetical and 'By OMENZ' line are slightly extraneous, but the density is justified for a gate tool with no annotations.

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?

Given 7 params, no annotations, and no output schema, the description does the hard work of explaining what comes back (verdict plus signed code) and what it will not do. The remaining gap is parameter-level detail for url, method, and the nested spend object, which an agent must infer from the schema alone.

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 0% across 7 params including two nested objects, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for max price ('price within max'), expected_pay_to, the owner's spend policy, and the passport token, but leaves 'url', 'method', and the internal shape of the 'spend' object entirely undefined.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('the authorization step for agent payments'), and states its distinctive scope: 'live quote + preflight ... payee check ... fair-price check ... spend policy'. An agent can tell it apart from the sibling preflight/quote tools because it explicitly bundles those checks into a single gate before payment.

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?

Gives a clear trigger condition: 'One call before paying any x402 endpoint', which is explicit when-to-use guidance. It does not say when to prefer the sibling preflight or quote alone, nor what to do on REVIEW vs DECLINE beyond consuming the verdict, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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

All OMENZ agent tools tools Inspect

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

Need Help?