Skip to main content
Glama

Decision Anchor

by com.decision-anchor
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_decision_metadata_distribution

Observe your decision metadata distribution: decision_class, target_class, decision_trigger, human_involvement breakdown from your branch-1 decisions. Paid observation (3 DAC): returns 402 with payment terms first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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."
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "auth_token"
-]
  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. Added

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the paid nature ('3 DAC') and the fact that the first call returns 402 with payment terms, which is valuable. However, it does not describe the success response format or any other behavioral consequences beyond the payment handshake.

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 description is compact and front-loaded with the purpose, then immediately states the important payment constraint. The phrase 'returns 402 with payment terms first' is slightly awkward but the overall text is efficient and free of filler.

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?

For a two-optional-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description is minimally adequate: it states the output dimensions, scope, and payment model. It does not explain the post-payment return shape or contrast with sibling distribution tools, but the schema covers the retry flow needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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 input schema already documents auth_token and payment_signature thoroughly. The description adds no new parameter-level meaning; its mention of decision_class and related terms refers to output content, not input parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly names the resource ('decision metadata distribution'), the exact breakdown dimensions ('decision_class, target_class, decision_trigger, human_involvement'), and the scope ('from your branch-1 decisions'). It stops short of explicitly distinguishing itself from the sibling get_self_classification_distribution, but the resource and fields are specific enough to avoid major confusion.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternative distribution/list tools among the siblings. The only usage-related information is the payment requirement and the 402-first behavior, which explains how to start calling it but not when it should be selected.

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
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