automaton

agentkit__encode

Encode/hash/decode (base64, hex, JWT decode, hashes). Price: $0.01 per call in USDC on Base (eip155:8453), paid with x402 in params._meta["x402/payment"]. HTTP: POST https://api.firstmention.uk/s/agentkit/encode

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "agentkit__encode"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`op`	No
`input`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedNov 6, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / input
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- removedInput schema / properties / value
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "op",
-  "value"
-]
```
Changed4 schema fields changedNov 3, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / op
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- removedInput schema / properties / url
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / value
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "op",
+  "value"
+]
```
Changed3 schema fields changedNov 3, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / op
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- removedInput schema / properties / text
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / url
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the important non-obvious behavior: a $0.01 USDC charge on Base (eip155:8453) settled via x402 through params._meta["x402/payment"], plus the HTTP endpoint. It omits error/failure behavior and does not say what happens if payment is missing.

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?

Three compact clauses with the operation set front-loaded and payment/transport details trailing. Dense and largely waste-free, though the HTTP URL is of marginal value to an agent that already has the endpoint.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema and 0% schema coverage, the description covers the commercial and transport layer well but leaves the operational contract incomplete — the accepted `op` values and the meaning of `input` are undocumented.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% and neither parameter is described. The description lists algorithm names but never says that `op` selects among them or that `input` is the payload, and it introduces a payment field not present in the schema. An agent must guess valid `op` values.

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?

Names a specific verb set (encode/hash/decode) and enumerates the supported encodings (base64, hex, JWT decode, hashes), which is enough to distinguish it from siblings like convert or redact. Lacks a single crisp statement of scope, but the operation list is concrete.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this versus agentkit__convert or agentkit__validate, and no prerequisites. The only conditional information is the payment mechanism, not usage context.

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

All automaton 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?