Skip to main content
Glama

Concierge Intel

by xyz.conc-exe
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

intel_wallet

intel-wallet — $0.10 USDC/USDG/USDT x402 (or TCX credits). POST https://conc-exe.xyz/api/concierge-intel-wallet. Default body: {"solAddress":"REPLACE_ME"}. Unpaid calls return live PAYMENT-REQUIRED accepts (Solana/Base/Arbitrum USDC · Robinhood USDG · BNB USDT/USDC Permit2).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNoJSON POST body for the intel/security route
agentIdNoOptional Concierge agent id (agt_…)
creditsWalletNoSolana wallet for TCX prepaid credits (x-tcx-credits-wallet)
paymentSignatureNoBase64 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE after x402 settlement. Omit to receive a structured payment challenge (or settle via creditsWallet / SOON holder headers).
soonHolderWalletNoSolana wallet for SOON/TCX holder free tier (X-Soon-Holder-Wallet)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / agentId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional Concierge agent id (agt_…)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / body / default / solAddress
      Added value: +"REPLACE_ME"
    • changedInput schema / properties / body / description
      Previous value: -"JSON POST body"New value: +"JSON POST body for the intel/security route"
    • addedInput schema / properties / creditsWallet
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Solana wallet for TCX prepaid credits (x-tcx-credits-wallet)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / paymentSignature / description
      Previous value: -"Base64 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header after x402 settlement"New value: +"Base64 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE after x402 settlement. Omit to receive a structured payment challenge (or settle via creditsWallet / SOON holder headers)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / soonHolderWallet
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Solana wallet for SOON/TCX holder free tier (X-Soon-Holder-Wallet)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

D1.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description discloses payment gating (unpaid calls return PAYMENT-REQUIRED) and settlement options, but does not explain what happens after payment or any side effects. It also does not clarify whether the tool performs reads, writes, or other operations. The information is fragmented and lacks clarity on the tool's behavior.

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 poorly structured. It mixes payment details, endpoint URL, and settlement instructions in a way that obscures the tool's purpose. The lack of clear sections or logical flow reduces readability and comprehension.

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?

The description is incomplete for a tool with this many parameters and sibling tools. It fails to provide essential context about the tool's function, expected output, or typical use case. The absence of an output schema and the cryptic payment-centric text make it difficult for an agent to know when or how to invoke it correctly.

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% with all five parameters described in the schema (body, agentId, creditsWallet, paymentSignature, soonHolderWallet). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema fields; it merely rephrases them. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already provides full parameter explanations.

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 focuses on payment details (cost, endpoint, settlement) but never states what the tool actually does. It mentions 'intel-wallet' and a POST endpoint, but omits the intended action (e.g., retrieving wallet intelligence). No verb or resource is clearly defined.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., intel_airdrop, intel_whales). The description only explains payment mechanics, not usage context or selection criteria.

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

All Concierge Intel 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