Skip to main content
Glama
1tylermitchell

Sairen

by 1tylermitchell
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

bridge_oracle

Compare bridge routes and fees for stablecoin transfers across Base, Solana, Arbitrum, OP, and Ethereum using deterministic quotes from Across, Stargate, deBridge DLN, and Circle CCTP.

Instructions

    [Cost: $0.0010 USDC on Base & Solana] Cross-Chain Bridge Route & Fee Oracle.
    Deterministic comparison of Across, Stargate, deBridge DLN, and Circle CCTP routes
    for autonomous stablecoin transfers across Base, Solana, Arbitrum, OP, and Ethereum.

    Actions:
    - 'quote': Compare routes for token transfer. Params: {"source_chain": "base", "dest_chain": "solana", "amount": 100.0, "token": "USDC"}
    - 'supported': List supported chains, tokens, and bridge protocols.
    - 'status': Retrieve cached quote by quote_id. Params: {"quote_id": "..."}

    Args:
        action: Target operation name ('quote', 'supported', 'status').
        params: Dictionary of action parameters.
        payment_signature: Optional x402 transaction signature.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionNoquote
paramsNo
payment_signatureNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses cost ($0.0010 USDC on Base & Solana) and determinism, and implies caching via the 'status' action. However, it does not mention error behavior, rate limits, idempotency, or whether payment is required (payment_signature is optional). This is a partial disclosure.

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?

The description is well-structured with a header, action list, and args section. It front-loads the purpose and cost, and uses bullet points for clarity. It is not overly verbose given the multiple actions, though it could be tightened.

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 tool with three actions and no output schema, the description covers the actions and examples but omits return formats, error handling, and edge cases (e.g., what happens if no routes found). The cost and determinism are noted, but an agent may be unsure what to expect from 'quote' or 'supported' responses.

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 provides zero description coverage (0%), so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining the 'action' values, giving concrete examples for 'quote' and 'status' params, and noting that 'params' is a dictionary. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare type definitions.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: a cross-chain bridge route and fee oracle comparing Across, Stargate, deBridge DLN, and Circle CCTP for stablecoin transfers across specific chains. It names the protocols and chains, and the action list ('quote', 'supported', 'status') makes the scope explicit. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like DEX price oracles.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description gives context (for autonomous stablecoin transfers) and lists actions, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions or when to prefer other tools (e.g., DEX spot price tools for on-chain swaps). Since siblings are unrelated, the gap is moderate.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools