JMT x402 MCP Server

deep_research

Create deep research reports with cited sources for any topic. Pay $0.15 per report via USDC on Base.

Instructions

Deep research report with sources. Price: $0.15/call via x402 (USDC on Base mainnet).

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": {
      "topic": "<topic>"
    },
    "name": "deep_research"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`topic`	Yes	Research topic

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses price and that the report has sources, but not execution time, required credentials, data sources, or response format. Minimal transparency.

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?

Very concise: one sentence for purpose and one for price. No wasted words. However, price is secondary information that could be in annotations; still earns its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Minimal description for a tool with no annotations or output schema. Fails to explain nature of report, differentiation from siblings, or any usage constraints beyond price.

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 100% (only one parameter, topic, with description). Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but baseline 3 is appropriate when schema is sufficient.

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 states 'Deep research report with sources' which clearly implies the tool produces a research report. However, it lacks an explicit verb (e.g., 'generates') and does not differentiate from sibling research tools like crypto_research or company_intel beyond the broader 'deep' scope.

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 on when to use this tool over alternatives. It only mentions price, not context or exclusions. With many sibling research tools, this omission is significant.

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