Skip to main content
Glama

Robyn — Gasless Cross-Chain for AI Agents

by io.github.ox31461

Quote a gasless cross-chain route

robyn_quote

Best gasless route to move a token from one Robyn chain to another. Returns estimated output, the bridge used, duration, and the Robyn fee. Read-only — moves nothing. IMPORTANT: check quoteOnly on the response. If it is true the corridor can be PRICED but NOT settled — execute will refuse it with UNSUPPORTED_DIRECTION — so present that quote as a price comparison only and do not tell the user it can be sent. quoteOnlyReason says why. Absent/false means executable.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
amountYesamount in fromToken base units (e.g. "25000000" = 25 USDC)
toChainYesdestination chain id, or "stellar"
toTokenYestoken address / symbol on the destination
fromChainYessource chain id, or "stellar"
fromTokenYestoken address on the source chain (0x0000…0000 for native)
toAddressNorecipient on the destination chain
fromAddressNosender — determines membership (fee tier) AND whether a free netting path is available between these two accounts

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / fromAddress
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "sender — determines membership (fee tier) AND whether a free netting path is available between these two accounts",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature ('moves nothing') and reveals a critical behavioral nuance: the quoteOnly field indicates whether the route is executable, with detailed instructions on how to interpret and present it. This is exemplary transparency beyond typical tool descriptions.

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?

The description is five sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then the essential behavioral caveat. It uses bold and uppercase for the critical part, making it scannable. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a quote tool with no output schema, the description covers everything needed: return fields, read-only behavior, the quoteOnly exception, its reason, and the default executable status. This fully equips the agent to correctly interpret and present the tool's response in all cases.

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?

The input schema already provides complete descriptions for all 7 parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the schema's thoroughness.

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's function: 'Best gasless route to move a token from one Robyn chain to another' and lists the returned fields (estimated output, bridge, duration, Robyn fee). It explicitly says 'Read-only — moves nothing,' distinguishing it from execution tools like robyn_cross_chain 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Provides strong contextual guidance: it says to use the tool for quoting and explicitly warns about quoteOnly=true cases, instructing the agent to present such quotes as price comparison only and not as sendable. It references that 'execute will refuse it' but does not name the specific alternative tools (e.g., robyn_cross_chain) explicitly, so it falls just short of a 5.

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