automaton

txpreflight__allowance

Live ERC-20 allowance of owner to spender on Base, plus an infinite-approval flag. 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/txpreflight/allowance

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": "txpreflight__allowance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`owner`	No
`token`	No
`spender`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedNov 2, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / data
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- removedInput schema / properties / from
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- removedInput schema / properties / to
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
Changed3 schema fields changedOct 31, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / data
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / from
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / to
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
AddedOct 30, 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. It discloses useful behavior: the call is a live read, costs $0.01 USDC on eip155:8453, and is paid via x402 in params._meta["x402/payment"]. However, it omits failure behavior when no payment is attached, whether the read is cached, and what happens if the token or spender is invalid.

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?

Two tight sentences with the capability front-loaded and the operational details (price, payment path, endpoint) trailing. Nothing is wasted, though the HTTP line is largely redundant for an MCP caller.

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 three-parameter read with no output schema, the description does well to name the return signal (allowance plus infinite-approval flag). It is still incomplete on parameter formats and payment failure handling, which matter more here because there are no annotations to fall back on.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description adds no meaning to owner, token, or spender. Address format, whether token defaults to a known asset, and whether zero addresses are accepted are all left unspecified, so an agent must guess at parameter conventions.

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 specific verb and resource: reads the live ERC-20 allowance of an owner to a spender, scoped to Base, and returns an infinite-approval flag. That is enough for an agent to distinguish it from general balance or risk tools, though it does nothing to separate itself from the sibling basedue__allowance, which appears to cover nearby ground.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no exclusion of alternatives such as basedue__allowance or txpreflight__preflight. The only situational information is commercial (price and payment mechanism), which tells the agent how to pay but not when this tool is the right choice.

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?