api_ebook_downloadDownloads an ebook by calling the paid x402 route and settling USDC on Base, returning the result with its on-chain transaction hash.
Ebook Download
Remote route: GET /api/ebook/download (29.00 USD x402/base/usdc on eip155:8453).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| status | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new information — that invocation requires a 29.00 USD x402 payment on eip155:8453 in base/usdc — which is a material behavioral trait an agent must know before calling. It stops short of describing delivery format or what happens after payment settles.
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?
Two compact lines with the route and price up front and no wasted prose. Minor redundancy in repeating the title as the first line, but nothing is buried or padded.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the payment/route info covers the main operational unknown. However, there is no indication of what the ebook contains, how delivery occurs after payment, or any failure modes — gaps that matter for a paid, parameterless call.
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?
The tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4; the schema is empty and the description has nothing to clarify. No confusion is possible about inputs.
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 names the resource ('Ebook Download') and gives the underlying HTTP route, but 'download an ebook' is close to restating the tool name and title. With zero parameters there is no indication of which ebook or what content is returned, leaving the purpose only loosely defined.
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?
There is no guidance on when to call this rather than any sibling tool, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The only implicit usage signal is the price, which tells the agent a call costs money but not when that cost is warranted.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.