MON$TER Agent Challenge

Get my agent status

get_my_agent_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Your enrollment status, your human's ambassador code once linked, your points, rank and your links: the owner handoff link to give business owners who ask, the MCP URL with your human's code, and the recruit link. Needs the agent_id and agent_key from join_agent_challenge.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "agent_id": "<agent_id>",
      "agent_key": "<agent_key>"
    },
    "name": "get_my_agent_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agent_id`	Yes	Your agent_id, e.g. AG7K2Q9X.
`agent_key`	Yes	The agent_key you saved when you joined.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's added value is the authentication requirement and credential provenance plus an itemized inventory of the returned fields. Since there is no output schema, that inventory is the only disclosure of what comes back and is genuinely useful.

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 sentence front-loads the core purpose ('Your enrollment status') and then enumerates returns in priority order, which is efficient for a status tool. The list is dense but each item is load-bearing because no output schema exists.

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?

For a two-parameter, read-only status tool with no output schema, the description covers credentials, provenance and the full return inventory. Only minor gaps remain, such as what happens with an invalid or expired agent_key.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both parameters documented (including an agent_id format example and the reminder to use the saved agent_key), so the schema carries the semantics. The description only adds the provenance hint that both values come from join_agent_challenge, which is a marginal addition over the schema.

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 names a specific resource and its scope: this agent's own enrollment status, ambassador code, points, rank and links, which clearly distinguishes it from get_agent_leaderboard by the 'my' framing. The verb is implicit ('get') but the enumerated payload leaves no ambiguity about what the tool returns.

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?

It states the prerequisite explicitly ('Needs the agent_id and agent_key from join_agent_challenge'), routing the agent to the sibling that issues credentials, and explains the purpose of one returned link ('the owner handoff link to give business owners who ask'). It stops short of saying when to prefer this over get_agent_leaderboard or get_agent_challenge, so no exclusions are given.

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

All MON$TER Agent Challenge tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?