x402 Bazaar

token_info

Read-onlyIdempotent

Name, logo, website & socials for a token — Metadata for a Base token: name, symbol, logo image, official website and social links (X/Telegram/etc.) plus price & liquidity — from DexScreener. For agents and UIs enriching a token. Required input: address. Priced $0.01 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": "token_info"
  }
}

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

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real operational context: data source (DexScreener), cost model ($0.01 per call over x402 on Base), an auth path (prepaid x-credit-token header for unlimited calls), a free quota (1 free call/day per tool), and no API key requirement. That is genuinely beyond what annotations carry, with only return-shape details left to the output schema.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

It is front-loaded with the payload description, which is good, but the opening clause ('Name, logo, website & socials for a token') is then restated at length ('name, symbol, logo image, official website and social links'), and the pricing tail makes it a run-on string of em-dash clauses. The content is useful but not tightly edited.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with an existing output schema, the description covers source, scope, cost, and auth sufficiently for correct invocation; return values need not be spelled out. Minor gap: no coverage of failure modes (unknown address, token not indexed by DexScreener).

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: the address is scoped to a Base token, which constrains the value an agent should pass. It does not add format or validation detail for the address itself, so it sits just above baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a concrete resource and payload: token metadata (name, symbol, logo, website, socials) plus price and liquidity, sourced from DexScreener. It clearly tells an agent what it gets back, though it never names the nearby siblings it overlaps with (token_price, pair_info, token_supply), so it stops short of full disambiguation.

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?

The phrase 'For agents and UIs enriching a token' implies the use case, and the pricing/free-tier detail is practical context. But there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing away from overlapping siblings such as token_price or pair_info, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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?