pons-mcp

pons_launch_costs

Compare measured Pons launch, buy, and sell gas costs against live ETH gas price to estimate transaction expenses.

Instructions

Measured launch/buy/sell gas costs on Pons (static, measured 2026-09, clearly labelled) plus live eth_gasPrice for comparison.

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": "pons_launch_costs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing that the measured values are static, dated 2026-09, clearly labelled, and that eth_gasPrice is live. This prevents an agent from treating old measured values as current, though it does not describe output format or units.

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?

A single dense sentence conveys scope, data vintage, static nature, labelling, and live comparison with no filler. Every segment earns its place.

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 parameterless lookup tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it tells the agent what data is included and how current it is. It stops short of specifying units or exact return shape, but 'clearly labelled' partly compensates.

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?

The schema has zero properties, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description appropriately does not attempt to describe parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the tool reports measured launch/buy/sell gas costs on Pons plus live ETH gas price for comparison. It names the specific resource and metric, and is distinct enough from sibling tools even though no sibling is explicitly referenced.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied: call it when needing Pons gas cost data or when comparing historical measured costs against the current eth_gasPrice. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative sibling tools.

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