x402-rate-of-change
Rate Of Change: Rate Of Change
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
minia2a-mcp
by uk.minia2a
TDQS
D1.6/5.0
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 discloses nothing about inputs, computation method, output format, or side effects. 'Rate Of Change' gives the agent no behavioral information at all.
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 short but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. Three words that merely echo the tool name do not earn their place because they communicate no useful information.
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?
For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a completely empty input schema, the agent needs at least a definition of the computation and its return value. The description provides none of this, making the tool effectively unselectable on its merits.
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 schema has zero parameters and 100% vacuous description coverage, so there are no parameter semantics left to clarify. The 0-parameter baseline of 4 applies, although the description itself contributes no meaning.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Rate Of Change: Rate Of Change' is a pure tautology that merely restates the tool name. It provides no verb, no definition, no formula, and no clarification of what kind of rate of change is computed. It cannot be distinguished from siblings like x402-percentage-change or x402-returns.
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 about when to use this tool or how it relates to the many similar financial and mathematical tools. No alternatives are mentioned, no use cases are given, and no exclusions are stated.
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.