A
license-
qualityB
maintenanceA remote MCP server for Structural Lateration that provides tools to price, mint, and verify ML-DSA-65 signed receipts based on avoided costs from referencing prior attested shapes.
MIT
SettlementWitness
Server Details
Remote-first MCP adapter for emitting Settlement Attestation Receipts; not a verifier.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- nutstrut/default-settlement-verifier
- GitHub Stars
- 0
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
MCP client
Glama
MCP server
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.
100% free. Your data is private.
Tool Definition Quality
C2.6/5.0
Tool DescriptionsC
Average 2.1/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with other tools. The tool's name and description, while vague, are the sole entry point, so selection is unambiguous.
Naming Consistency5/5
The single tool name uses consistent snake_case and is descriptive of its function. Without multiple tools to compare, there are no naming inconsistencies.
Tool Count3/5
Having a single tool is on the border of being too thin for a typical MCP server. While it might be appropriate for a thin adapter, the low tool count limits the server's utility and makes it feel underdeveloped.
Completeness2/5
The tool set exposes only one operation, which is likely insufficient for a full SettlementWitness workflow. Agents would need additional operations (e.g., creating, listing, or querying settlements) to complete common tasks, so the surface is significantly incomplete.
Available Tools
1 toolsettlement_witnessCInspect
Thin MCP adapter that forwards to SettlementWitness and returns the exact receipt JSON.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| spec | Yes | ||
| output | Yes | ||
| task_id | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
C2.1/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool forwards to SettlementWitness and returns receipt JSON, which hints at delegating behavior and return format, but it does not disclose side effects, error behavior, or what the receipt represents. This leaves significant behavioral ambiguities.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness3/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single short sentence with no wasted words, which is structurally concise. However, its brevity sacrifices essential content; it is under-specified rather than effectively front-loaded. The sentence does state a clear action and return type, but the lack of detail limits its usefulness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has three nested-object parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and no sibling context, the description is far too minimal. It does not explain the workflow, input expectations, or output structure. AI agents would not have enough information to correctly select and invoke this tool in most scenarios.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation of the three parameters (task_id, spec, output). The parameters are generic objects with additionalProperties allowed, so the description must compensate by explaining their semantics or relationships, but it does not. This makes correct parameter invocation nearly impossible without external knowledge.
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?
The description identifies the tool as a 'Thin MCP adapter that forwards to SettlementWitness' and mentions returning 'exact receipt JSON'. This gives a specific resource and action, but the actual domain purpose of SettlementWitness is unexplained, making the tool's functional role vague. It is not a tautology, but it lacks enough clarity to fully distinguish it from potential alternatives.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no sibling tools listed, and the description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or appropriate contexts. The 'thin adapter' comment implies a simple passthrough but does not offer practical usage direction.
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.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Servers
CodexRun Ledger MCPofficial
Flicense-qualityDmaintenancePaid remote MCP for generating trustworthy code run receipts, scope summaries, missing evidence checks, and client handoff exports.
EVIDIQ MCPofficial
AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceRemote MCP server that exposes EVIDIQ's trust tools to verify counterparty capability, risk, and on-chain reputation, returning a signed Trust Report before any value moves.31MIT
vantic-mcpofficial
Alicense-qualityBmaintenanceEnables MCP hosts to verify agent spending mandates and receipts, providing stateless tools for authorization, chain verification, credential verification, and DID resolution.Apache 2.0