Decode an SSTV audio recording and anchor its fingerprint and image hash to the Knox event chain.
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Average 4.2/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: decode_sstv performs decoding and anchoring, while verify_sstv_decode handles verification. No functional overlap exists.
Both tool names follow the consistent verb_noun pattern (decode_sstv, verify_sstv_decode) using snake_case.
With only 2 tools, the server is tightly scoped to its core functionality: decoding and verifying SSTV audio. This is appropriate for a specialized server.
The tool set covers the complete lifecycle presented: decoding and anchoring, followed by verification. No obvious gaps for the stated domain.
decode_sstvAInspectDemodulate a presented slow-scan-television (SSTV) audio recording, anchor the audio fingerprint and the decoded image hash to the Knox event chain, and return a self-authenticating receipt bundle (Knox anchor + C2PA-aligned envelope + FRE 902(13)/(14)-shape affidavit). Audio bytes are NOT retained — only the SHA-256 fingerprint and the decoded image are anchored. Bonis Systems does not capture audio on its own; the audio must be presented by the caller (a public WebSDR recording, a customer-controlled SDR capture they consent to submit, or audio they own). Phase 1 supports Martin M1 (VIS code 0x2C, 320×256 RGB). Other VIS codes return mode = 'unsupported' with detected hex. Requires a Knox Bearer API key on the Authorization header — unauthenticated calls are rejected.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Display name for the recording (max 256 chars). | |
| capture | No | Optional capture-context metadata. | |
| sampleRate | No | Required when audioFormat = 'pcm16-mono'. | |
| audioBase64 | Yes | Base64-encoded audio. Either a complete WAV file (RIFF/WAVE, 8/16/24-bit PCM or 32-bit IEEE float, mono or stereo, 4-192 kHz) or raw 16-bit signed little-endian mono PCM samples. | |
| audioFormat | No | Audio container ('wav' default, or 'pcm16-mono'). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses that audio bytes are not retained, only fingerprints anchored, and that unauthenticated calls are rejected. Also notes unsupported modes return an 'unsupported' status. Annotations absent, so description carries burden well.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Description is informative but slightly dense; front-loaded with key action. Every sentence adds value, but some technical details could be streamlined.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers audio format, supported mode, anchoring, and auth, but lacks details on the output receipt bundle structure. No output schema, so description should clarify output fields more.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. Description adds context about anchoring behavior and auth requirements but does not significantly expand on parameter meanings beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's action: demodulate SSTV audio, anchor fingerprints, and return a receipt bundle. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'verify_sstv_decode' by focusing on decoding versus verification.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides context on when to use: supports Martin M1 only, audio must be provided by caller, requires authentication. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives beyond the sibling tool's name hint.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
verify_sstv_decodeAInspectVerify a previously anchored SSTV-decode record. Given a SHA-256 anchor hash (the payload_hash from a prior decode_sstv call), return the anchor record, predecessor hash, sequence number, and timestamp. Public — no authentication required. The verification path itself is also accessible at GET /api/knox/verify?hash=.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hash | Yes | SHA-256 anchor hash (64 lowercase hex chars). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description sufficiently discloses that the tool is public, returns specific fields (anchor record, predecessor hash, etc.), and mentions an alternative API endpoint. No contradictions with missing annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is three concise sentences, each providing distinct information: action, return fields, and public access with endpoint. No redundant text.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is thorough in covering purpose, input, output details, and usage context. Minor missing error handling info, but overall complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by linking the 'hash' parameter to the output of 'decode_sstv' and specifying it is SHA-256, beyond the schema pattern.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('verify') and the resource ('previously anchored SSTV-decode record'), and distinguishes it from the sibling 'decode_sstv' by referencing the hash from a prior decode call.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly indicates when to use this tool (after a 'decode_sstv' call) and states it is public. It does not explicitly exclude scenarios, but the context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
