x402-option-intrinsic
Option Intrinsic: Option Intrinsic
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
minia2a-mcp
by uk.minia2a
TDQS
D1.8/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only repeats the name and provides zero information about behavior, return format, or side effects. It is entirely uninformative.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness2/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely short, but this is not effective conciseness — it is under-specification. It provides no front-loaded information about the tool's purpose or behavior, so every word is wasted.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite having zero parameters and no output schema, the tool still needs a description that explains its domain and expected behavior. The description is completely inadequate for an agent to know what an 'Option Intrinsic' operation does, especially given thousands of siblings.
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?
The input schema has 0 parameters, so there are no parameter semantics that need to be documented. The schema coverage is trivially complete, and the description does not need to compensate for any missing parameter documentation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose2/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description is a tautology — 'Option Intrinsic: Option Intrinsic' just restates the tool name 'x402-option-intrinsic' without adding any verb or explanation. It does not state what the tool does, what an option intrinsic value is, or how it differs from the sibling x402-option-time-value.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance whatsoever on when to use this tool. It does not mention context, prerequisites, or alternatives such as x402-option-time-value or x402-black-scholes-call. An agent cannot determine when this tool is appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
D1.6/5.0
Disambiguation1/5
The tool set is saturated with near-duplicates and synonyms: character-count vs char-count, clamp vs clamp-value, is-abundant vs is-abundant-num vs is-abundant-number, and fetch vs browser-scrape vs web-scrape vs text-scrape. Generic names like 'difference', 'normalize', 'range', and 'partition' make the boundaries even harder for an agent to determine.
Naming Consistency2/5
Most tools share a x402- kebab-case prefix, but the set mixes noun-only names (math, hash, prime, time), verb-first names (get_stats, find, validate), auto-generated names (x402-publish-1787853294312-base-account), and inconsistent variants like temp vs temperature vs temperature-convert. This is not a coherent verb_noun convention despite the common prefix.
Tool Count1/5
1677 tools is an extreme count that creates selection paralysis and makes coherent agent use impractical. A utility or marketplace server at this scale needs sub-services or namespacing rather than a flat tool list.
Completeness2/5
The surface has broad token coverage across many utility categories, but the marketplace aspect is incomplete: service_discovery and get_stats exist, yet there are no generic publish, update, delete, or account-management operations. Utility families also contain redundant variants without clear completion or lifecycle structure.