cuporacle-mcp

Agent spend ledger

wc_spend_ledger

Read-only

Retrieves a read-only audit trail of autonomous spend transactions, including amount and receipt for each wc_edge attempt, plus total against the spend cap.

Instructions

The agent's own purchase history: every wc_edge attempt with amount and receipt tx, plus the session total against the spend cap. Free, read-only — the audit trail for autonomous spend.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "wc_spend_ledger"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entries`	Yes
`cap_usdc`	Yes
`paid_count`	Yes
`remaining_usdc`	Yes
`session_total_usdc`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true; description adds that it is 'Free' and details what data it returns (every attempt, receipt tx, session total). 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?

Single sentence effectively packs all key information: purpose, contents, characteristics (free, read-only), and context (audit trail). 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?

Given the tool has an output schema (not shown but present) and no parameters, the description fully explains what the tool returns and its purpose. Complete for an audit/log tool.

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?

No parameters (empty input schema), so baseline is 4. Description correctly implies no inputs needed.

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 states it is the agent's purchase history, listing specific contents (wc_edge attempts with amount and receipt tx, session total against spend cap). Clearly distinguishes from siblings like receipt_verify or wallet_fund_guide.

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?

States it is a free read-only audit trail for autonomous spend, implying when to use (to review spending). Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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

Deploy Server