@agirails/mcp-server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions(1)Admin

agirails_request_service

Request a service from an AGIRAILS agent by generating a TypeScript snippet that initiates an ACTP transaction. Funds are not locked until you accept the quote.

Instructions

Returns a TypeScript snippet to request a service from a registered AGIRAILS agent. The generated code initiates an ACTP transaction (INITIATED state). Funds NOT locked yet; use agirails_accept_quote after receiving a price.

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": {
      "service": "<service>",
      "input": "<input>",
      "budget": "<budget>"
    },
    "name": "agirails_request_service"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`service`	Yes	Service type to request (e.g. "translation", "analysis"). Becomes the first argument to Agent.request() in SDK 3.0.
`input`	Yes	Work data to send to the provider (e.g. text to translate, data to analyze).
`budget`	Yes	Max USDC willing to pay (e.g. 5, 10.50). Funds are locked in escrow only after quote acceptance.
`agentSlug`	No
`network`	No		testnet

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0May 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Discloses the state change (INITIATED) and that funds are not locked, adding context beyond readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words, front-loaded with the main purpose. Highly efficient.

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?

Explains return type and state, but could clarify whether the tool executes the request or just returns a snippet. Lacks information on error handling, side effects, or how to use the snippet. Given complexity, more detail would help.

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 60%, and description adds some value for the service parameter (mentions SDK usage). However, agentSlug lacks description in both schema and description, and no additional param details are provided.

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 returns a TypeScript snippet to request a service, initiating an ACTP transaction. Differentiates from siblings like agirails_accept_quote and agirails_cancel.

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?

Explicitly mentions that funds are not locked yet and advises to use agirails_accept_quote after receiving a price. Provides clear next-step guidance, though could be more explicit about when not to use.

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