Genesis402

Answer a question from a document

genesis402_answer_from_text

Answer a single question from your supplied document and return the exact supporting quote for traceable contract, policy, filing, or email answers.

Instructions

Paid ($0.006 USDC). Answer one question strictly from a document you supply, and return the verbatim quote that supports the answer. Use for contract, policy, filing or email questions where the answer must be traceable to the source. For an overview rather than one answer use genesis402_summarize; to pull many named fields at once use genesis402_extract_json. Returns the answer and a supporting quote that the rail verifies appears in the text. Payment: call once without payment_signature to get the exact price quote (nothing is charged or signed), then call again with the signed payment to receive the result and settlement details.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	Yes	The source document to answer from, up to 24,000 characters.
`question`	Yes	One question about the text, up to 500 characters, e.g. 'What is the termination notice period?'.
`payment_signature`	No	Optional. An x402 v2 payment you signed for this call's quote (the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header value). Omit to get the price quote first; nothing is charged without it.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	Yes	QUOTE_ONLY: price quote only, nothing signed or charged. PAID: the call was paid and result holds the data. FREE: the endpoint answered without payment.
`paid`	Yes	true only when a payment was settled for this call.
`price`	No	The Base USDC quote. Present on QUOTE_ONLY and on PAID calls made by a local payer; null when the rail offered no Base USDC lane or the caller signed the payment.
`result`	No	PAID or FREE: the endpoint's JSON result.
`resource`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: the full URL of the paid resource.
`how_to_pay`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: how to sign and resend the call.
`settlement`	No	PAID: decoded PAYMENT-RESPONSE settlement (transaction hash, network, payer), or null if the rail sent none.
`what_you_get`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: the rail's description of what the payment buys.
`payment_required_b64`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: the raw base64 PAYMENT-REQUIRED header, to sign with any x402 v2 client.
`also_accepted_networks`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: every network the 402 challenge accepts.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.3.6Oct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only give readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description carries far more — the exact price ($0.006 USDC), the two-call payment handshake (first call returns a quote with nothing charged or signed, second call with the signed payment settles), and the quote-verification behavior ('the rail verifies appears in the text'). This is precisely the behavioral context annotations cannot supply.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: price and core purpose lead, siblings follow, payment mechanics close. Every sentence carries load. Slightly over-packed — the payment flow could be one sentence shorter — but nothing is filler.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be re-explained, and the description still covers the two-step paid-call workflow, the verification guarantee, and routing to siblings. For a paid, open-world tool with non-read-only semantics, this is complete enough to invoke correctly on the first try.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline would be 3, but the description adds real semantics beyond the schema: the meaning of omitting payment_signature (quote-only, no charge) and the fact that the returned quote is machine-verified against the supplied text. It doesn't cover text length limits, but the schema already does.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('answer one question strictly from a document'), plus the distinctive output ('the verbatim quote that supports the answer'). It names the two closest siblings (genesis402_summarize, genesis402_extract_json) and the conditions that select them, so an agent can differentiate it 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit when-to-use ('contract, policy, filing or email questions where the answer must be traceable to the source') and explicit alternatives with their selecting conditions ('For an overview... use genesis402_summarize; to pull many named fields... use genesis402_extract_json'). Nothing is left to inference.

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