Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

automaton

by uk.firstmention.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

token_dd__txbatch

One-call token due diligence for Base/Ethereum tokens: DexScreener markets + GoPlus security/holders + chain RPC, joined and scored. Free /preview teaser. Price: $0.01 per call in USDC on Base (eip155:8453), paid with x402 in params._meta["x402/payment"]. HTTP: GET https://api.firstmention.uk/s/token-dd/txbatch

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_dd__txbatch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chainNoChain: base, ethereum, etc.
addressYesToken contract address, 0x + 40 hex

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / address / description
      Previous value: -"0x-prefixed 40-hex token contract address"New value: +"Token contract address, 0x + 40 hex"
    • changedInput schema / properties / chain / description
      Previous value: -"Chain id, e.g. base"New value: +"Chain: base, ethereum, etc."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "chain",
-  "address"
-]New value: +[
+  "address"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
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 it does disclose useful behavior: multi-source aggregation, scoring, an HTTP endpoint, and a paywall. However, it omits failure modes, rate limits, whether the call errors when payment is missing, and what the joined result looks like, which matters for a paid composite tool.

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 the core value proposition and packed into two dense sentences with no filler. It is telegraphic (joined clauses, bare URL) but nothing is redundant.

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 paid, multi-source composite with no output schema and no annotations, the description should say something about the return structure and clarify the batch/tx semantics implied by the name. Payment and data sources are covered, but the output and sibling differentiation are not.

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% for chain and address, so the baseline would be 3. The description goes beyond the schema by documenting the payment carrier params._meta['x402/payment'] and the USDC/eip155:8453 currency, information that appears nowhere in the input schema.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource ('token due diligence ... DexScreener markets + GoPlus security/holders + chain RPC, joined and scored'), which is clearer than the name alone. But it never explains the 'txbatch' suffix or how this differs from the sibling token_dd__batch or token_dd__tx, leaving the agent unable to tell which of the near-identical token_dd tools to pick.

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?

It mentions a free /preview teaser and per-call pricing, which addresses cost but not selection. There is no statement of when to use txbatch versus token_dd__batch, token_dd__check, or token_dd__verify, and no prerequisites or exclusions.

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

All automaton toolsInspect
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