Get domain-verified L402/x402 services with proven ownership for reliable agent payments. Filter by category and limit to refine results.
Get only domain-verified L402/x402 services — these have proven ownership of their domain and are more trustworthy for agent payments.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (default 20) | |
| category | No | Optional category filter |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only explains that results are filtered to domain-verified services and gives a trust rationale; it does not disclose response shape, pagination behavior, auth requirements, rate limits, or other operational details.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the core selection behavior and the trust rationale efficiently.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has only optional parameters and a clear purpose, making the description reasonably usable. However, there is no output schema and the description does not explain what the returned data looks like or how results are ordered/paginated, so some context is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no additional meaning for the 'limit' or 'category' parameters beyond what the input schema already states.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get only domain-verified L402/x402 services.' It clearly identifies the filtering scope and differentiates this tool from sibling search/list tools by emphasizing the domain-verified trust criterion.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies this tool is for agents needing trustworthy services for payments, but it does not explicitly say when to choose it over alternatives like search_l402_services or list_l402_services_by_category. The use case is hinted at rather than stated as clear guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.