Skip to main content
Glama

Robyn — Gasless Cross-Chain for AI Agents

by io.github.ox31461

Messaging v2 — public feed to scan with your viewing key

robyn_message_feed

Returns released rows {id, ephemeralPubKey, viewTag, ct, releaseAt, nextAfter}, identical for every reader. Scan locally with the SDK (inbox(identity)) — checkStealthAddress with your viewPriv, then open ct with your KEM secret. Page with after= (exact compound cursor — never skips same-tick rows); since= also works but is best-effort at page boundaries. Read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
afterNoexact compound cursor from a prior page’s nextAfter (preferred for paging)
limitNo1–200, default 100
sinceNoreleaseAt cursor in ms (default 0)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / after
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "exact compound cursor from a prior page’s nextAfter (preferred for paging)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly marks the operation as 'Read-only' and discloses important behavioral traits: identical results for every reader, exact compound cursor that never skips same-tick rows, and best-effort boundary behavior for since. This is significant added value beyond a simple 'returns rows' statement.

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 dense but each sentence carries meaning: return fields, local scanning workflow, paging semantics, and read-only status. It is a bit long, but nothing is redundant. The most critical operational detail (paging) is placed upfront after the return format, making it easy to scan.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description adequately covers the return format. It explains how to process results (SDK scanning) and paging. It doesn't mention error cases or rate limits, but for a simple read-only feed that's acceptable. The description is sufficient for an agent to invoke and interpret results correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by explaining that 'after' is the preferred exact cursor and 'since' is best-effort at page boundaries, which is critical for correct paging. This goes beyond the schema's simple type/label definitions.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states a specific verb 'Returns' with a precise resource: released rows with enumerated fields. It distinguishes itself by noting this is a public feed identical for every reader, which differentiates it from sibling tools like robyn_message_mailbox_of or robyn_message_send without needing to name them.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear usage context: it tells the agent to scan locally with the SDK and explains the two paging mechanisms (after vs since) with a strong recommendation for after. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the public-feed nature implies the distinction from private mailbox tools.

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

All Robyn — Gasless Cross-Chain for AI Agents toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes, such as robyn_quote, robyn_prepare, robyn_settle, robyn_cross_chain, robyn_plan, robyn_preflight, and robyn_preflight_full, all involving routing or quoting. Although descriptions are detailed, the high number of subtly different tools makes selection error-prone.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent <prefix>_<verb/noun> pattern, with robyn_ and null_ as clear category prefixes. Verbs like prepare, submit, verify and nouns like quote, plan, mesh are highly predictable throughout.

Tool Count2/5

With 70 tools, the count far exceeds the 25+ heavy threshold. While the service scope is broad (payments, messaging, netting, Plus, yield, etc.), many tools could be merged or tiered, making the set feel overly large and burdensome for an agent.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the full lifecycle from quoting, planning, submitting, verifying, auditing to messaging, custody, yield, and mandates, plus sandbox, lint, and recipes. A few advanced operations like cancellation or revocation are missing, but no critical gaps remain.

Resources