Agent Search Proofficial
F
licenseNot graded
qualityA
maintenanceEnables agent-native web search and multi-angle research synthesis with pay-per-call USDC payments on Base via x402, requiring no API keys or subscriptions.
-
keryx
Server Details
Autonomous research agent that pays every source it cites in USDC on Arc via x402 micropayments.
If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- tang-vu/keryx
- GitHub Stars
- 1
- Server Listing
- keryx
Available Tools
2 toolskeryx_statusKeryx remote MCP statusBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Describe this MCP surface, its payment behavior, and the active caller tier.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
TDQS
B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that it returns payment behavior and caller tier, which provides some extra context beyond annotations, but does not elaborate on side effects or details of the return. No contradiction with annotations.
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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the action. It is concise but uses the imperative 'Describe' rather than a declarative statement, which slightly reduces clarity. No wasted words.
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?
The description mentions the high-level outputs (surface, payment, caller tier) but does not detail what 'MCP surface' means or the format of the response. Without an output schema, a more explicit description of the return would improve completeness. It is adequate but leaves ambiguity.
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?
There are 0 parameters, so schema coverage is trivial (100%). The description does not need to add parameter meaning. Baseline of 4 is appropriate given no 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?
The description clearly states the tool describes the MCP surface, payment behavior, and active caller tier. It is a specific verb-resource pairing, though it could be more precise (e.g., 'returns information about...'). It distinguishes from the sibling 'research' tool by implying different functionality.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not provide context for selection or exclusions. The only sibling is 'research', but no comparison is made.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
researchResearch with KeryxAInspect
Research a question under a USDC creator-payment budget. Keryx selects sources, pays access tolls and weighted citation rewards, then returns a grounded answer and receipt.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| model | No | Optional Keryx model catalog id, for example deepseek-chat. | |
| budget | No | Maximum creator-payment budget in USDC; clamped to the caller's tier. | |
| question | Yes | Research question. |
TDQS
A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description discloses payment behavior and answer format, adding context beyond annotations (e.g., 'pays access tolls and weighted citation rewards'). No contradictions with annotations.
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?
Two efficient sentences with front-loaded purpose. Every word adds value without redundancy.
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?
The description covers key aspects: action, budget mechanism, process, and output (answer and receipt). No output schema, but sufficient for agent selection.
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%, and the description adds meaning to the budget parameter by explaining its role in payments. No parameter documentation gaps.
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 action ('Research a question') and unique mechanism (USDC creator-payment budget, source selection, tolls and rewards), which distinguishes it from sibling 'keryx_status'.
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?
Implied usage: the tool is for research questions with a budget. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, though sibling difference is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
2 tool updates
- First observed
keryx_status - First observed
research
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such asio.github.acme/serveralso needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
Compact, citation-verifiable public web context for AI agents, paid per use with x402.
Web intelligence for AI agents: fetch, render, extract, research. x402 micropayments, no API keys.
Live web search and research synthesis for agents, with free samples and x402 USDC payments.
x402-paid analytics, market intelligence, research, and LLM inference for AI agents.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenancePaid web research MCP tools for autonomous agents: search, page extraction, citations, and diff monitoring through a live x402 API. Unpaid calls return the Base USDC payment requirement so agents can pay and retry safely.41MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables fully local, zero-cost autonomous research by planning questions, searching and reading web pages, generating cited summaries or reports, and retaining semantic memory across sessions.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables autonomous research by integrating multiple free sources including web search, Wikipedia, arXiv, and Crossref, with no API keys required.MIT
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
The two tools are highly distinct: keryx_status provides metadata about the server and caller, while research performs a complex research task. There is no functional overlap.
Naming Consistency4/5
Both use snake_case, but keryx_status is a noun phrase (status check) and research is a bare verb (action). Minor inconsistency in verb_noun pattern, but both are clear and predictable.
Tool Count3/5
With only 2 tools, the server feels minimal. While each tool has a clear scope, the small count may leave users wanting more (e.g., budget configuration, history). Borderline thin for a general-purpose server.
Completeness3/5
The server covers status and research, but lacks complementary tools like budget management, source listing, or result history. For a dedicated research assistant, these are notable gaps.