Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

AgentBIT

by app.agentbit
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Counterparty Verify (AML)

agentbit.counterparty_verify
Read-onlyIdempotent

One AML/KYC-style verdict for a counterparty from a single call: wallet sanctions + on-chain risk, name sanctions screening, GLEIF company identity and technical counterparty risk, merged into clear | review | blocked with an itemized findings list. $0.02. Pay-per-call via x402 (USDC, Base).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "agentbit.counterparty_verify"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoPerson or entity name to screen against sanctions lists
domainNoDomain to run technical counterparty risk on
addressNoEVM wallet address to screen (0x + 40 hex)
_paymentNoOptional base64 x402 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE payload. Omit to receive payment requirements.
company_nameNoLegal company name to verify via GLEIF

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/non-destructive, lowering the bar. The description adds useful context: $0.02 pay-per-call via x402, output categories, and an itemized findings list. 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 sentences, front-loaded with the core value proposition and then pricing. The long first sentence is structured with a colon and a list, and every clause earns its place.

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?

Description covers the output verdict categories and payment mechanism, and the schema documents each parameter. It doesn't state whether at least one identifier is expected or how to handle partial inputs, which is a gap for a 5-optional-parameter tool.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description maps input categories to purposes (wallet sanctions→address, name→name, GLEIF→company_name, technical→domain), but the schema already states these per parameter, so little new meaning is added.

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?

States it produces 'One AML/KYC-style verdict' by merging wallet sanctions, on-chain risk, name sanctions, GLEIF identity, and technical risk into clear/review/blocked with an itemized findings list. This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from narrower sibling tools like sanctions_screen or wallet_screen.

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 phrase 'from a single call' implies this is the consolidated alternative to running individual checks, and the enumerated components hint at sibling tools. However, it never explicitly names alternatives or states when to prefer this over agentbit.counterparty_risk or sanctions_screen.

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

All AgentBIT toolsInspect
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