Skip to main content
Glama
deenesjakoruzh
8randonpickart5

x402-buyer-mcp

by 8randonpickart5
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

x402-buyer-mcp

x402 经济的通用购买代理。

一个 MCP 服务器，允许 Claude Desktop、Cursor 和 Claude Code 用户自动发现、支付并调用任何 x402 端点。向 Claude 提问，它会用 USDC 支付答案费用。

发现功能由 Decixa（超过 5,500 个经过验证的 x402 端点）提供支持，并带有本地注册表回退机制。

安装

Claude Desktop / Cursor

添加到您的 MCP 配置中：

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "x402-buyer": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "x402-buyer-mcp"]
    }
  }
}

要求

  • Node.js 18+

  • AgentCash 钱包已设置，并在 Base 链上存入 USDC

Related MCP server: signal402-mcp

工具

工具

描述

x402_discover

搜索 x402 端点 —— 查询 Decixa 的 5,500 多个经过验证的 API，并带有本地回退

x402_call

通过 AgentCash 使用 USDC 自动支付调用任何 x402 端点

x402_balance

检查您的 AgentCash 钱包余额

x402_research

多端点并行研究 —— 同时调用 3-5 个端点

工作原理

  1. 您向 Claude 提问（“stripe.com 安全吗？”）

  2. x402_discover 在 Decixa 和本地注册表中搜索匹配的端点

  3. x402_call 通过 AgentCash 在 Base 链上以 USDC 支付端点费用

  4. 数据返回，Claude 合成答案

本地注册表包含 8 个由优质来源（VirusTotal、People Data Labs、Hunter.io、AbuseIPDB、Qualys SSL Labs、NIH RxNorm、US Census、ESPN、The Odds API）支持的 Alderpost 智能端点。Decixa 将发现范围扩展到整个 x402 生态系统。

发现架构

主要： Decixa /api/agent/resolve —— 对 5,500 多个经过验证的 x402 端点进行语义搜索，按延迟、价格、信任评分和能力匹配度进行排名。

回退： 包含 8 个精选 Alderpost 端点的本地注册表，具有完整元数据。如果 Decixa 无法访问，则自动使用。

这种“软切换”模式意味着即使网络中断，发现功能也能正常工作。

本地注册表端点

端点

价格

优质来源

Domain Shield

$0.12

VirusTotal (70+ 引擎)

Company X-Ray

$0.15

People Data Labs, Hunter.io

Threat Pulse

$0.10

VirusTotal, AbuseIPDB

Compliance Check

$0.15

Qualys SSL Labs

Prospect IQ

$0.12

People Data Labs, Hunter.io

Sports Edge

$0.12

ESPN, The Odds API, Claude AI

Property Intel

$0.10

US Census, OpenWeather

Health Signal

$0.10

NIH RxNorm, FDA

更新日志

v2.0.0

  • Decixa 集成 —— 发现功能现在将 Decixa 的 /api/agent/resolve API 作为主要来源，本地注册表作为回退（软切换模式）。

  • x402_discover 返回整个 x402 生态系统的结果，而不仅仅是 Alderpost 端点。

  • 增加了从自然语言查询到 Decixa 基于动词的分类法的能力映射。

  • 更新了工具描述以反映全生态系统的发现能力。

  • 获得 Decixa 的首个集成合作伙伴信用。

v1.0.5

  • 修复了 npm bin 条目和 ESM 模块配置。

  • CLI 移至根目录 cli.js。

v1.0.0

  • 初始版本，包含 4 个工具和 8 个 Alderpost 端点。

鸣谢

  • 发现：Decixa —— AI 代理的决策层

  • 支付：AgentCash —— AI 代理的 USDC 钱包

  • 智能：Alderpost —— 捆绑智能 API

链接

许可证

MIT — Alderpost LLC

Available Tools

4 tools
x402_balanceA

Check your AgentCash USDC wallet balance on Base.

Returns current balance available for x402 payments and approximate number of calls you can afford. No parameters required.

If AgentCash is not set up, provides instructions to create and fund a wallet.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It accurately describes the read-only behavior, the information returned, and the fallback for unset wallets. No contradictions or hidden side effects noted.

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 sentences, each providing essential info: purpose, return details, and fallback. No redundancy, perfectly front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple balance check tool with no output schema, description covers all needed aspects: what it does, what it returns, and what happens if setup is missing. Context is fully complete.

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?

Zero parameters and schema coverage 100%. Description reiterates no parameters are required, which adds no new info but is consistent. Baseline 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.

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 specifies the tool checks the AgentCash USDC wallet balance on Base, detailing what is returned (balance and approximate call count). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like x402_call (which likely makes payments) and x402_discover.

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?

The description states no parameters are needed and mentions setup instructions if missing. It implicitly conveys when to use (when you need balance info), but does not explicitly discuss when not to use or provide alternatives.

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

x402_callA

Call any x402 paid API endpoint with automatic USDC payment via AgentCash.

Accepts a full URL with query parameters. Handles the complete x402 payment flow:

  1. Sends request → receives 402 payment requirement

  2. Signs USDC payment on Base via AgentCash wallet

  3. Retries with payment proof → returns endpoint data

Requires AgentCash wallet to be set up and funded (https://agentcash.dev).

Examples:

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesFull endpoint URL with query parameters

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses the 3-step payment flow, requirements for AgentCash wallet, and retry logic. No contradictions or hidden behaviors.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections, bullet-point steps, and examples. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy.

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?

Given no output schema, the description lacks explicit return value details, but examples imply endpoint data. Overall, it covers purpose, flow, requirements, and usage adequately.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers the 'url' parameter with 100% coverage, and description adds examples and explains it accepts full URLs with query parameters, adding value beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states it calls x402 paid APIs with automatic USDC payment. It distinguishes from siblings (x402_balance, x402_discover, x402_research) which handle different aspects of the x402 protocol.

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?

Provides when-to-use context with examples and mentions integration with x402_discover. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but context is sufficient.

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

x402_discoverA

Search for x402 paid API endpoints that can answer a question or provide data.

Discovery powered by Decixa (5,500+ verified x402 endpoints) with local registry fallback. Searches across the entire x402 ecosystem — not just Alderpost endpoints.

Local registry includes premium endpoints backed by VirusTotal, People Data Labs, Hunter.io, AbuseIPDB, Qualys SSL Labs, NIH RxNorm, US Census Bureau, OpenWeather, The Odds API.

Categories: security, company/business, threat intelligence, sales/leads, compliance, health/drug, property/location, sports, and any x402 capability indexed by Decixa.

Examples:

  • query "domain security" → finds Domain Shield + other x402 security scanners

  • query "company information" → finds Company X-Ray + other enrichment APIs

  • query "verify factual claims" → finds verification endpoints via Decixa

  • query "drug interactions" → finds Health Signal (NIH RxNorm)

Use x402_call to call any discovered endpoint.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesWhat data do you need? E.g. "domain security", "company revenue", "drug interactions", "verify a claim"

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the tool as a read-only search across the ecosystem, mentions the fallback mechanism, and lists categories. No destructive behavior is indicated, and no contradictions are present.

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 bullet points and examples, front-loading the core purpose. While somewhat lengthy, every sentence adds value and the structure aids readability.

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?

The description lacks explicit details about the output format (e.g., what fields are returned). Given no output schema, this is a notable gap. However, the mention of x402_call for calling endpoints implies the tool returns endpoint details, and the examples suggest a list.

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 single parameter 'query' has a clear description in the schema, and the tool description adds valuable examples and context (e.g., 'domain security' → finds Domain Shield). Schema coverage is 100%, so the description complements the schema well.

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 it searches for x402 paid API endpoints, specifies the source (Decixa with local fallback), and distinguishes it from siblings like x402_call. Examples illustrate specific queries and expected results.

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?

The description tells when to use this tool (for discovery) and explicitly links to x402_call for calling endpoints. It provides query examples but does not explicitly state when not to use it or alternatives.

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

x402_researchA

Run comprehensive research by calling multiple x402 endpoints in parallel.

Given a subject (domain, IP, address, drug name, or sport), this tool:

  1. Detects the input type automatically

  2. Finds all relevant x402 endpoints (local registry)

  3. Calls up to 5 endpoints simultaneously with automatic payment

  4. Returns all results combined for synthesis

This is the fastest way to get a complete intelligence picture on any subject.

Input types (auto-detected):

  • Domain "stripe.com" → calls security + company + threat + compliance + sales (~$0.64)

  • IP "8.8.8.8" → calls threat intelligence (~$0.10)

  • Address "123 Main St Milwaukee WI" → calls property/location (~$0.10)

  • Drug "ibuprofen" → calls health intelligence (~$0.10)

  • Sport "nba" → calls sports intelligence (~$0.12)

Set max_cost to control budget per research call (default: $1.00).

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
subjectYesThe subject to research: domain, IP, address, drug name, or sport
max_costNoMaximum total cost in USD (default: 1.00). Cheapest endpoints called first.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses parallel calling, automatic payment, and cost control via max_cost. However, it omits details like authentication requirements, error handling, rate limits, and potential side effects.

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?

The description is well-structured with a clear main sentence, followed by bullet points and examples. It is concise yet informative, with no redundant sentences. Every part contributes to understanding the tool's functionality.

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?

Given no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: input processing, parallel execution, and cost management. It lacks details on return format and error scenarios, but these are mitigated by the tool's simplicity and the combined results description.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% description coverage. The description significantly adds value by explaining the subject parameter's auto-detection behavior and providing concrete examples. For max_cost, it clarifies that cheapest endpoints are called first, which is not evident from the schema alone.

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: running comprehensive research by calling multiple x402 endpoints in parallel. It specifies the input types (domain, IP, address, drug, sport) and the workflow (auto-detection, endpoint selection, parallel calls). This distinguishes it from siblings like x402_call, which likely calls a single endpoint.

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?

The description provides clear usage context, including when to use (fastest way to get intelligence) and examples for each input type. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with sibling tools like x402_call or x402_discover.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 4 tool updatesv2.0.0
    • First observedx402_balance
    • First observedx402_call
    • First observedx402_discover
    • First observedx402_research
Deploy Server
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

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Scored across 4 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: checking balance, making a single payment-supported call, discovering endpoints, and running parallel research. No overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the 'x402_<action>' pattern with consistent lowercase and underscores. The actions are all verbs except 'balance', which is a noun but commonly understood as a verb in API contexts.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools are exactly appropriate for the server's purpose. Each tool is essential and none feel redundant or missing.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full workflow: discover endpoints, check balance, call an endpoint, and run multi-endpoint research. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose of interacting with x402 APIs.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessUnresponsive

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers