Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Spraay x402 MCP Server

Spraay x402 MCP Server

by plagtech
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

spraay_free_timestamp

Read-only

Retrieve the current Unix timestamp. Free to call and read-only. Accepts optional JSON query parameters via the params argument.

Instructions

Current Unix timestamp. Free to call. Read-only. Pass any query parameters as a JSON string via the params argument.

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": "spraay_free_timestamp"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsNoQuery parameters as JSON (e.g. {"key":"value"})

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesTrue when the gateway call succeeded; false when it returned an error.
dataNoThe gateway response payload on success. The exact shape depends on the tool (see the tool description and the JSON in the text content block).
errorNoHuman-readable error message, present only when ok is false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv4.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds that it's free and returns the current timestamp, which is consistent but adds marginal value beyond the annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the core purpose and then explain the parameter usage. No unnecessary words.

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 read-only tool with output schema available, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, cost (free), side effects (none), and parameter handling. No critical gaps.

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% with one parameter. The description reiterates the param usage but adds the phrase 'any query parameters' which could be ambiguous. No significant enrichment beyond what the schema provides.

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 it returns the current Unix timestamp. The verb 'timestamp' is specific, but it does not differentiate from other spraay_free_* siblings like free_gas or free_nonce, which is acceptable given the name distinction.

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 versus alternatives. It only mentions it's free and read-only, but does not specify use cases or contrast with other timestamp or free tools.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools