x402 Bazaar

lp_lock

Read-onlyIdempotent

Is liquidity locked, how much, until when? — Surfaces the LP holders, how much of the LP supply is locked or burned vs pullable, the lockers, and unlock dates. Unlocked liquidity is the clearest rug setup — this shows the detail a one-line 'LP locked: yes/no' hides. Required input: address. Priced $0.02 per call over x402 on Base; send a prepaid x-credit-token header for unlimited calls, or get 1 free call/day per tool. No API key required.

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": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "lp_lock"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`address`	Yes	Token contract address

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	No	The result payload. Shape is service-specific; every field is documented in the tool description.
`service`	No	The service id that answered.
`checkedAt`	No	ISO-8601 timestamp of when the underlying reads were taken.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedAug 31, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / data / description

Previous value: -"The result payload. Shape is service-specific; every field is documented in the service description above."New value: +"The result payload. Shape is service-specific; every field is documented in the tool description."

Changed1 schema field changedAug 31, 2026
- removedOutput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "data"
-]
```
AddedAug 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the description's burden is lower. It earns credit by disclosing operational traits the annotations omit: $0.02 per call over x402 on Base, a prepaid x-credit-token header for unlimited calls, 1 free call/day, and no API key requirement. It does not contradict the annotations.

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?

It is front-loaded with a compact question that frames the resource, then layers in the surfaced fields and the payment model. Every sentence carries information, though the pricing/credit mechanics sentence is long and only loosely related to invoking the tool correctly.

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?

With an output schema present, the description doesn't need to enumerate return values, and it still summarizes the categories of data surfaced. It covers the single required input and the payment/auth model, leaving only minor gaps such as which chains a token address may belong to.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('Token contract address'), so the schema already carries the semantics and the baseline is 3. The description only restates 'Required input: address' without adding format, chain, or validation detail beyond the schema.

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 names a precise resource and scope: whether liquidity is locked, by how much, until when, plus the LP holders, lockers, and burned-vs-pullable split. That level of detail cleanly separates it from adjacent siblings such as exit_liquidity, pair_info, or token_pools, which don't enumerate lockers and unlock dates. An agent can tell what it returns without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives a motivating context ('unlocked liquidity is the clearest rug setup') that implies use during rug/safety screening, but never states when to prefer it over rug_score, rug_monitor, or exit_liquidity. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided, so usage is only implied.

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

All x402 Bazaar 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?