Skip to main content
Glama

AINumbers Fintech Intelligence Suite

by co.ainumbers
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Royalty Split Validator

validate_royalty_split
Read-onlyIdempotent

Royalty Split Validator: OpenChainGraph compute node (compliance_mandate). Deterministic OpenChainGraph compute node. By default (compute:"auto") inputs are computed server-side on Cloudflare Workers for gpu:false nodes with a registered kernel; compute:"browser" forces client-side execution and returns a browser delegation URL instead. gpu:true nodes always delegate to the browser. Inputs are processed transiently to compute the response and are not stored, logged, or retained. Use synthetic or anonymised inputs only. Exports an AP2 artifact with execution_hash for chain provenance. Open at: https://ainumbers.co/chaingraph/art-208-royalty-split-validator.html FV-status (published/proven/still-trusted for this spec): /fv-status/8498d0819c941fdb731f9e10f5d93ee929026919cb111a42149821b48b5ac180.json — a snapshot, not a subscription; this receipt verifies offline regardless of whether that file is ever fetched. Output schema: call describe_tool("validate_royalty_split").

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
computeNoCompute mode (v0.4 Compute Binding). "auto" (default) = server for gpu:false nodes with registered kernels; "server" = force server-side; "browser" = always return browser delegation URL. gpu:true nodes always delegate.
parent_hashesNoexecution_hash values from upstream ChainGraph AP2 artifacts to chain from (sets chain.parent_hashes in the export).
parent_tool_idsNotool_id values matching parent_hashes, in the same order.
policy_parametersNoInput parameters for this tool's decision function. For gpu:false nodes with a registered kernel, these are computed server-side when compute is "auto" or "server". See the tool's manifest for field names.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "cap_bps": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "config_hash": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "disclaimer": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "mode": {
-      "enum": [
-        "bps",
-        "percent"
-      ],
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "recipient_count": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "rules": {
-      "items": {
-        "additionalProperties": false,
-        "properties": {
-          "detail": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "id": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "label": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "pass": {
-            "enum": [
-              false,
-              true
-            ],
-            "type": "boolean"
-          }
-        },
-        "required": [
-          "detail",
-          "id",
-          "label",
-          "pass"
-        ],
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "sum": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "valid": {
-      "enum": [
-        false,
-        true
-      ],
-      "type": "boolean"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "cap_bps",
-    "config_hash",
-    "disclaimer",
-    "mode",
-    "recipient_count",
-    "rules",
-    "sum",
-    "valid"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "cap_bps": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "config_hash": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "disclaimer": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "mode": {
+      "enum": [
+        "bps",
+        "percent"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "recipient_count": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "rules": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "detail": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "label": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "pass": {
+            "enum": [
+              false,
+              true
+            ],
+            "type": "boolean"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "detail",
+          "id",
+          "label",
+          "pass"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "sum": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "valid": {
+      "enum": [
+        false,
+        true
+      ],
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "cap_bps",
+    "config_hash",
+    "disclaimer",
+    "mode",
+    "recipient_count",
+    "rules",
+    "sum",
+    "valid"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it explains the compute-mode resolution (auto/server/browser, gpu:true delegation), that inputs are processed transiently and not stored or logged, and that an AP2 artifact with execution_hash is exported for chain provenance. Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent safety profile, and nothing here contradicts them.

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?

Contains duplicated phrasing ('OpenChainGraph compute node' twice) and an inline FV-status hash plus a URL that add bulk without aiding invocation. The genuinely useful compute-mode caveat is buried mid-paragraph behind infrastructure preamble.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description mitigates this by directing the agent to describe_tool for the output shape, and it discloses the artifact/provenance behavior. What remains missing is the semantic content of the decision inputs and what 'valid' means, which is material for a validator with an opaque policy_parameters object.

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 schema already documents compute, parent_hashes, and parent_tool_ids; the description merely restates the compute mode semantics. Crucially, policy_parameters — the actual decision inputs — is opaque in both the schema and the description, which defers to an off-tool 'manifest' rather than adding meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a verb and resource ('Royalty Split Validator') and labels the node class ('compliance_mandate'), but never says what a royalty split is validated against or what the decision function checks. The name itself already carries the substance, so the description largely restates the title plus infrastructure boilerplate rather than describing the tool's function.

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?

The only usage instruction is 'Use synthetic or anonymised inputs only', which is a data-safety constraint rather than a when-to-use rule. It never says when to pick this over siblings like calculate_erc2981_royalty, validate_nft_metadata_art209, or validate_tempo_token_compliance, nor are prerequisites or exclusions stated.

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

All AINumbers Fintech Intelligence Suite 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