Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

automaton

by uk.firstmention.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

token_dd__verify

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/verify

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__verify"
  }
}

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

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the burden well: it discloses that results are an aggregation of two third-party APIs plus RPC (implying external dependency and possible staleness), the exact cost ($0.01/call in USDC on Base), the payment mechanism and where the payment object goes in params._meta, and the HTTP method/URL. It omits return shape, scoring methodology, and any failure/rate-limit behavior.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the capability before cost and transport details. Every clause carries information, though the dense x402 payment sentence is the least skimmable part.

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 2-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential unknowns: data provenance, price, payment flow, and endpoint. The main residual gap is that with no output schema, the description never describes the shape of the 'scored' verdict an agent will receive.

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 coverage is 100%, so both address and chain are already documented. The description only adds the constraint 'Base/Ethereum tokens', which marginally narrows the valid chain values beyond the schema's 'base, ethereum, etc.' No format or default guidance is added.

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?

Specific verb+resource: token due diligence verification, naming the exact data sources joined (DexScreener markets, GoPlus security/holders, chain RPC) and the output character ('joined and scored'). It does not distinguish itself from close siblings like token_dd__check or token_dd__batch, so an agent cannot route between them from this text alone.

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?

The description says what the call does but never states when to prefer it over token_dd__check, token_dd__batch, basedue__due, or solcheck__risk. The only usage-adjacent signal is 'Free /preview teaser', which refers to a different endpoint, and the price line, which tells cost but not selection criteria.

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