Skip to main content
Glama

x402 trust score for an endpoint (paid)

x402_trust_score

Check an x402 endpoint's trust score (0-100), verdict, advertised price, and flags before paying. Avoid dead, fraudulent, or hijacked endpoints by evaluating health and cost in one call.

Instructions

Trust score (0-100, grade A-F) for a SPECIFIC x402 endpoint, PLUS a machine-readable verdict ('recommendation': proceed|caution|avoid|parameterize), the advertised price ('advertised.amountUsd'), a confidence-adjusted band ('scoreRange'), and structured flags ('flagsDetailed' with code/severity/message — any severity 'error' means avoid). The 'parameterize' verdict (with 'templated':true) means the resource URL still contains an unresolved template placeholder (e.g. {slug}, :slug or %7B…%7D): the endpoint is otherwise healthy but the literal URL can't be paid as-is — substitute a valid value first, then the health metrics apply to the resolved URL. For such templated per-item endpoints, a varying payTo/price is EXPECTED (one wallet/price per item): the report surfaces 'stats.payToVaries'+'payToDistinct30d' and 'advertised.amountRange30d' as a 'payto-varies'/'price-varies' note rather than a 'payto-changed-recently' hijack error — always pay the payTo in the live 402 quote, not a cached listing. Includes the full component breakdown, the provider-advertised 'serviceName' and 'description' (unverified provider claims, shown next to our independent metrics), and 30-day on-chain stats. Note: 'stats.avgLatencyMs' is measured from a single EU vantage point and includes network distance to the endpoint (see 'stats.latencyVantage'), so a geographically distant endpoint reads slower even when its server is fast. One call answers WHETHER and at WHAT PRICE to use an endpoint. Call this BEFORE paying an unknown x402 endpoint to avoid dead, fraudulent, or recently-hijacked services. Pay-per-call over x402; auto-pays if a wallet is configured, otherwise returns the price quote.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resourceYesFull x402 resource URL to evaluate, e.g. https://api.example.com/v1/thing
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behaviors: pay-per-call over x402, auto-pay if configured, latency measured from a single EU vantage point, handling of templated URLs, and the 'payto-varies' note for per-item endpoints. This goes far beyond a basic hint and gives the agent crucial operational context.

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 long but every sentence adds value: core purpose, verdict semantics, caveats, and usage context. It is front-loaded with the main output and structured logically, with no wasted words.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain return values. It does so thoroughly, listing the verdict, price, scoreRange, flags, stats, and provider claims, plus caveats about latency and templated endpoints. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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% for the single 'resource' parameter, which already includes a description. The description adds meaningful nuance about parameter usage, such as what counts as a templated URL and the need to substitute a valid value, which helps the agent use the parameter correctly.

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 computes a trust score (0-100, grade A-F) for a specific x402 endpoint, with a machine-readable verdict and price information. It distinguishes from siblings like trust_bulk and trust_preview by emphasizing 'SPECIFIC' and detailing what the report includes.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to use: 'Call this BEFORE paying an unknown x402 endpoint to avoid dead, fraudulent, or recently-hijacked services.' It also explains the auto-pay behavior. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/JonasFuchss/x402-trust-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server