Skip to main content
Glama

Validate SAP SNS Records

sap_sns_validate_records

Validate SNS records for SAP agent compatibility (checks SOL, Pic, TXT records on-chain).

SAP MCP execution guidance: Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: paid builder; estimate first, then pay/build and finalize unsigned transactions locally when returned. Routing: paid hosted call; call sap_estimate_tool_cost first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool if the runtime cannot handle x402 natively. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainNoThe .sol domain name whose SNS records should be validated for SAP agent compatibility

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesMCP content blocks returned to the caller.
isErrorNoTrue when the tool result represents an application-level error.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / description
      Added value: +"Validate SAP SNS Records input schema. Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: paid builder; estimate first, then pay/build and finalize unsigned transactions locally when returned. Routing: paid hosted call; call sap_estimate_tool_cost first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool if the runtime cannot handle x402 natively. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required. Use exact field names from this schema; do not guess aliases or include private key material."
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (not read-only), but the description suggests validation which is typically read-only. The boilerplate implies it builds a transaction, but this is not stated explicitly. There is a contradiction between description and annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is brief but includes a large block of generic SAP MCP execution guidance that is irrelevant to this specific tool, making it cluttered and inefficient.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Despite having an output schema, the description does not clarify the return value or the fact that it may build a transaction. The paid builder workflow is hinted via boilerplate but not integrated. Incomplete for a tool with mutation potential.

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?

Only one parameter 'domain' with schema description coverage at 100%. The tool description adds no new information beyond the schema's description, meeting baseline but not exceeding.

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 it validates SNS records for SAP agent compatibility, checking SOL, Pic, TXT records on-chain. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sap_sns_get_domain_records by focusing on validation for compatibility, but does not explicitly call out differences.

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 like sap_sns_check_domain or sap_sns_get_domain_records. The generic SAP MCP boilerplate does not provide context-specific usage instructions.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.