Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
x402-pilot

x402-pilot

by DrVelvetFog
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

lint_scheme_spec

Checks a draft scheme spec against the bundled template, reporting missing or extra sections and whether required load-bearing concepts are specified.

Instructions

Lint a draft scheme spec (markdown) against the bundled scheme_template.md: reports missing/extra template sections and whether the draft pins down the load-bearing concepts a scheme must specify (value/recipient assertion, settlement identifier, replay protection, atomic+decimals amount encoding, verify/settle flow). Reads the bundled corpus; no network.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "lint_scheme_spec"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesPath to the draft scheme markdown.
templateNoOptional template path relative to the plugin root (default .x402-specs/scheme_template.md).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden and does reasonably well: it discloses the source of truth ('reads the bundled corpus') and the side-effect profile ('no network'), which together signal a local, read-only analysis. It does not explicitly state that no files are written or whether a failing draft returns an error versus a report, leaving a small gap.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and resource in the opening clause, followed by the report contents, which is the right order for an agent. The parenthetical list of load-bearing concepts is dense — five items in one run-on — but every item is substantive rather than filler.

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?

For a two-parameter, non-destructive analysis tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the input meaning, the reference template, the offline behavior, and the shape of the findings. Only the actionable output form (report vs. failure) is left unspecified.

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%, so the schema already documents both path and template, including the default. The description reinforces that the template is the bundled one and frames it as the baseline corpus, but adds no syntax, format, or override-behavior detail beyond that.

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 pairs a specific verb (lint) with a specific resource (a draft scheme spec in markdown) and names the reference artifact it checks against (bundled scheme_template.md). It goes further to enumerate exactly what the report contains, so an agent can distinguish this from validate_extension or check_compliance without opening any schema.

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 scenario is implied by 'draft scheme spec' — you lint before finalizing — but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative among the siblings. An agent must infer that this is a pre-submission self-check rather than a conformance run.

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