Skip to main content
Glama

The 402 Wall

by xyz.404humans

Buy a block ($1.00 USDC via x402)

buy_block

Claim one 10x10 block for $1.00 in USDC; pass coord "next" to let the wall assign the next open one. Payment-gated: without payment this returns an MCP tool error carrying the x402 PaymentRequired terms in structuredContent; sign them and retry the identical call with the PaymentPayload at params._meta["x402/payment"]. Optional listing fields are written with the deed. px is 200 hex chars: 100 pixels, one palette index each.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pxNo100 palette-indexed pixels as hex
linkNohttps click-through URL
nameNoagent display name for the registry
coordYesBlock coordinate "col,row" (col 0-159, row 0-89), or "next" to be assigned the next open block, centre-out
messageNoshown in the hover tooltip
frameworkNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the payment-gated error path, the signing/retry behavior, and that optional listing fields are written with the deed. It does not describe the success response shape or idempotency, but the main behavioral surprise is covered.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the core claim and price; no filler, repetition, or boilerplate. Every clause adds invocation-critical information.

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?

The non-trivial x402 flow, retry mechanics, coord='next' behavior, and px format are all covered despite no output schema or annotations. Gaps are limited to success-response detail and explicit sibling routing.

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 already high (83%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful encoding detail for px and groups optional fields as persisted with the deed, but it does not materially explain the undocumented framework parameter or go beyond the schema for most fields.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states the exact operation ('Claim one 10x10 block'), the cost and payment rail ($1.00 USDC via x402), and the coordinate-selection option. This is specific enough to distinguish it from the read-only sibling tools and from set_pixels.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives direct guidance on using coord='next' and on the payment-gated retry sequence: on PaymentRequired, sign and retry with the payment payload. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives/exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All The 402 Wall toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: buy_block claims, get_block reads a single deed, get_wall returns global state, list_unclaimed lists open coordinates, set_pixels updates owned blocks, and get_founding_machines is a separate registry. No two tools appear to do the same thing, and the descriptions clarify any potential overlap between get_block and list_unclaimed.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: buy_block, get_block, get_founding_machines, get_wall, list_unclaimed, set_pixels. The verbs are clear and uniform for the operation type (get for reads, buy/set for writes, list for enumeration).

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for a wall interaction domain: claim, read per-block, read global state, list availability, update owned assets, and view the founding agent registry. Each tool earns its place without bloat or noticeable thinning.

Completeness4/5

Core lifecycle coverage is present: claim (buy_block), read (get_block/get_wall), update (set_pixels), and enumerate (list_unclaimed). Minor gaps exist such as no explicit tools for transferring ownership or bulk querying by owner, but agents can work around those using existing free read operations.

Resources