JMT x402 MCP Server

crypto_price

Look up live cryptocurrency prices by coin ID. Each call costs $0.03 in USDC on Base mainnet via the x402 protocol.

Instructions

Live crypto price lookup. Price: $0.03/call via x402 (USDC on Base mainnet).

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": "crypto_price"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No	Coin ID (default: bitcoin)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description includes pricing and payment method (x402 on Base mainnet), adding some behavioral context. However, it does not mention rate limits, read-only nature, or any other operational traits, so transparency is moderate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very brief and front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence is relevant, but it omits some potentially useful details, earning a high conciseness score.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple lookup tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the core functionality and pricing. However, it does not describe the return format or limitations.

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 description coverage is 100% (the parameter 'id' is fully documented in the schema). The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool fetches a live crypto price. However, it does not distinguish from a sibling like 'crypto_research' which may also provide price data, so clarity is strong but not fully differentiated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'stock_quote' or 'crypto_research'. The description offers no context for selection.

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