Skip to main content
Glama

zkproofport-ai

by app.zkproofport.ai
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_guide

Read the current circuit-specific guide before proof generation. Includes witness preparation, supported signature modes, verification chain and live deployment payment configuration.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
circuitYesCanonical circuit id or supported alias. Read get_guide for the circuit-specific witness and verification chain.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / circuit / description
      Previous value: -"Circuit alias to get the guide for."New value: +"Canonical circuit id or supported alias. Read get_guide for the circuit-specific witness and verification chain."
    • changedInput schema / properties / circuit / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "coinbase_kyc",
-  "coinbase_country"
-]New value: +[
+  "coinbase_attestation",
+  "coinbase_country_attestation",
+  "oidc_domain_attestation",
+  "arc_eligibility",
+  "giwa_attestation",
+  "coinbase_kyc",
+  "coinbase_country",
+  "oidc_domain"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It communicates that the operation is a read ('Read the current... guide') and hints that results are dynamic via 'current' and 'live deployment payment configuration.' However, it does not describe the return format, possible failures, or any access/authentication expectations.

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 lead sentence is front-loaded and information-dense, and the bullet list is easy to scan. The URL list repeats enum values somewhat, but it remains compact and useful.

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 simple one-parameter read tool, the description supplies purpose, timing, and content scope. It is slightly incomplete in distinguishing canonical circuit IDs from supported aliases agreement, but an agent can still select the correct parameter from the enum and invoke the tool confidently.

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 coverage is 100% and the circuit parameter is already documented with an enum and a description. The bullet list adds concrete endpoint URLs for five circuits but does not clarify which enum values are canonical IDs versus aliases, leaving some semantic ambiguity that the schema does not resolve.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Read the current circuit-specific guide before proof generation.' It names distinct content areas (witness preparation, signature modes, verification chain, payment configuration) and clearly separates this read-only guide tool from the sibling prove and get_supported_circuits tools.

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?

The phrase 'before proof generation' explicitly instructs when the tool should be invoked relative to prove. It does not mention when not to use it or explicitly name alternatives like get_supported_circuits, but the context makes the intended usage unambiguous.

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

All zkproofport-ai 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