Skip to main content
Glama

Robyn — Gasless Cross-Chain for AI Agents

by io.github.ox31461

Prepare a gasless action (returns what to sign)

robyn_prepare

Turn a plain-language or structured intent into a concrete plan plus the EXACT payload to sign. Costs nothing, moves nothing, needs no key. Returns status:"sign" with signRequest, or status:"quoted" if something is still missing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenNoUSDC, USDT, ETH, ...
amountNobase units, overrides amountHuman
intentNoplain language, e.g. "send 25 USDC to 0xabc... on arbitrum"
toChainNo
fromChainNo
toAddressNo
amountHumanNohuman units, e.g. 25 for 25 USDC

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the tool is non-destructive and does not require keys, but lacks details on rate limits, auth requirements, or error handling. The return statuses are partially explained.

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?

Three sentences, no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by behavioral note and return info. Efficient and clear.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With 7 parameters, no required, and no output schema, the description gives a high-level view but lacks detail on parameter interactions or full return structure. It is moderately complete for a first glance but insufficient for complex usage.

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 57% (4 of 7 params described). The description adds context that input can be plain language or structured, aligning with the 'intent' param, but does not elaborate on other params like toChain or fromChain. Baseline 3 is appropriate given moderate coverage.

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 clearly states the tool converts an intent into a concrete plan and the exact payload to sign. It mentions return statuses ('sign' or 'quoted'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like robyn_quote or robyn_submit.

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?

The description implies safe usage with 'Costs nothing, moves nothing, needs no key' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings like robyn_quote for quotes or robyn_submit for submission. No direct alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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