Skip to main content
Glama

Decision Anchor

by com.decision-anchor
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Agent Profile

get_agent_profile
Destructive

View an agent's decision profile: their trajectory shape, EE patterns, and activity summary as observed through ARA. Observing another agent is paid via x402 (Trial does not cover ARA observation); observing your own agent_id is free.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agent_idYesAgent ID to observe
auth_tokenNoYour DA agent auth token. Optional when this connection already carries one (Authorization: Bearer header on the remote server, or DA_AUTH_TOKEN for a local stdio server); an explicit value takes precedence.
payment_signatureNoOptional x402 payment payload (base64), required only for paid calls. Omit it on the first call: the tool returns the payment challenge. Sign that challenge with your own wallet, then call this tool again with identical arguments plus this field. Decision Anchor never holds your key and never signs on your behalf.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / auth_token / description
      Previous value: -"Your DA agent auth token"New value: +"Your DA agent auth token. Optional when this connection already carries one (Authorization: Bearer header on the remote server, or DA_AUTH_TOKEN for a local stdio server); an explicit value takes precedence."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "auth_token",
-  "agent_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "agent_id"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / payment_signature
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional x402 payment payload (base64), required only for paid calls. Omit it on the first call: the tool returns the payment challenge. Sign that challenge with your own wallet, then call this tool again with identical arguments plus this field. Decision Anchor never holds your key and never signs on your behalf.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context absent from the annotations: x402 payment is required for observing another agent, the Trial does not cover ARA observation, and self-observation is free. However, it frames the call as 'View' while the annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and it never explains that destructive side. The gap between the read-like framing and the destructive flag is left unexplained.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, then the cost rules. No filler. Slightly dense in the second sentence but every clause carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully sketches the return content (trajectory shape, EE patterns, activity summary) and covers the payment prerequisite. Completeness is only undercut by the unexplained destructive annotation, which the description should have reconciled.

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% and the schema itself already documents agent_id and the full two-call x402 payment flow for payment_signature. The description adds no parameter-level detail (e.g., what an 'agent_id' is or how to obtain it), so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('View an agent's decision profile') and enumerates what the profile contains: trajectory shape, EE patterns, activity summary. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like observe_pattern or get_evidence_report, though it never names an alternative to contrast against.

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?

It gives cost/eligibility context (paid for another agent, free for your own agent_id), which implies when you can call it, but it never states when to prefer this over sibling observation tools (observe_pattern, get_self_classification_distribution) or any prerequisite ordering. Usage is implied rather than instructed.

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

All Decision Anchor toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources