Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
aqb-agent

aqb-agent

by yss787976-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

aqb_quote

Get a USDC quote for 1 AQB from the on-chain vault and Uniswap V2 pool to check pricing before payment or redemption.

Instructions

Quote 1 AQB in USDC from the vault (1.0) and the Uniswap V2 pool

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": "aqb_quote"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pairNo
amountNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. 'Quote' weakly implies a non-mutating lookup, but the definition never states read-only semantics, whether both sources' prices are returned or a single best price, auth requirements, or rate limits.

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?

A single front-loaded phrase with no filler, and the key qualifiers (USDC, vault, Uniswap V2) come early. The parenthetical '(1.0)' is ambiguous notation that costs a little clarity.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema description coverage on two parameters, the definition leaves critical unknowns: what the quote returns, how 'pair' is formatted, and whether 'amount' overrides the stated 1 AQB. It is not sufficient for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% and the description adds little: it mentions neither the 'pair' parameter nor the format/units of 'amount'. Worse, it hardcodes '1 AQB', which reads as contradicting the presence of an amount parameter rather than explaining it.

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 verb 'Quote' plus the resource (AQB priced in USDC) and the two liquidity sources (vault 1.0 and Uniswap V2 pool) make the operation identifiable and distinguish it from the sibling transaction tools like aqb_pay or aqb_cash_out. It falls short of 5 because the phrasing is compressed and does not explicitly frame this as a price-lookup tool relative to its siblings.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus the many sibling tools, no prerequisites, and no note that this is a pre-trade check rather than an execution step. The only usage signal is implied by the word 'Quote'.

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

This server cannot be deployed

Other Tools